The warnings of bomb attacks on parliament and efforts to raise religious hatred and major divisions in the country through the constitution debate have so far met with no success, as the opponents show little substance in the debate on the Interim Report of the Steering Committee of the Constitutional Assembly.
The debate continues with increased days as the search for understanding on the need for a new constitution and the key factors in the constitutional changes envisaged in it remains, with those opposed to any constitutional change unable to make much headway with facts that must be the substance of the debate.
The structure of the State of Sri Lanka - whether unitary or republican, the position of Buddhism, the Executive Presidency and the National Question remain the key issues in the debate, with diversions of political manipulation such as the challenge to the validity of the Constitutional Assembly, the story of a US drafted constitution being with the government, and the fears for national unity as seen from the Catalan issue in Spain, certainly adding to the diversity bunkum and frill in the debate.
The build up by the opposition, especially by the Joint Opposition (JO) supported by racial and religious extremist forces, seeking to show that what was before the Parliament, converted to the Constitutional Assembly, was the final draft of the next constitution, certainly lost much of its impact as the debate moved on, and the Prime Minister made it clear the preparation of a new constitution needed a much broader and longer discussion, reaching the next Sinhala-Tamil New Year, in April 2018.
With the government’s declared commitment to have a religious state, as opposed to a secular state, giving Buddhism the foremost place, the Prime Minister has emphasized the government would meet the Mahanayake Theras and other religious leaders, as well as political parties, to continue the search for national consensus on the issue of a new constitution. He was conveying the message that preparation of a constitution is a major task of the people, with the participation of all sections of society in the democratic process, and could not be the task of those embracing extremist positions.
There was an interesting agreement by the government on many of the key issues raised by the JO, with the agreement to preserve the “ekeeya bhavaya” or unitary status of the Republic, giving Buddhism the foremost place, Provincial Councils not being allowed to create divisions in the country, and the Leader of the Opposition to be elected by Parliament. Prime Minister Wickremesinghe was clear the government did obtain a mandate to compile a new constitution, which was also part of the policies of the key parties in the ruling coalition, the UNP and SLFP, and was thus working according to its mandate.
Local Polls
The signing of the Gazette to hold the Local Government polls could lead to a new debate over the control and running of local government bodies in the country. However, with the politics of power being more the stuff of all debate today, the constitution will remain in the campaign for the local government polls. The JO with its new political arm of the Lotus Bud - Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP), will take its overall false anti-constitutional change message, with its other criticisms of the government in the approaching campaign for elections due in the last week of January 2018.
The Local Polls will certainly be a major challenge to the government with a clear threat to its unity, as the SLFP and the UNP will be contesting each other, with the SLPP looking forward to making capital from this confrontation. The efforts to bring some unity within the SLFP have so far showed no success. The JO sections are calling for the SLFP leadership to be given to former President Mahinda Rajapaksa to bring about any such unity; which will not be accepted by President Maithripala Sirisena.
The SLPP looking forward to pushing the Sirisena-led SLFP to third place in the Local Government Polls will also face another major political challenge. The divisions in the SLFP – between the SLFP and SLPP – will give strength to the UNP that remains undivided, a political party, a mass following that looks forward to bigger and better days ahead. The divisions within the SLFP, and the emergence of the SLPP with Rajapaksa leadership, will certainly place the UNP on a new position of strength, posing a major political opposition to the SLPP, preventing it from showing what it believes to be the renewed strength of Mahinda Rajapaksa in electoral politics.
Dual citizenship
The Supreme Court has given the final verdict rejecting petition of Geetha Kumarasinghe, against the Appeal Court judgment that ruled her election as a Member of Parliament invalid due to being a Dual Citizen.
This decision comes when the Australian Government is faced with a major crisis with the Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce having to resign with the High Court finding his election invalid due to having New Zealand citizenship too. Shortly after the resignation of Mr. Joyce, the President of the Australian Senate, Stephen Parry, also resigned when it was revealed he could be a UK citizen by descent through his father. In a country that is largely an immigrant nation, this position is certainly troubling, as many politicians are unaware of their citizenship links, because of unknown foreign citizenship that had come through their parents – these include New Zealand, Italian, Greek, Canadian and Cypriot citizenships.
The Court order on Geetha Kumarasinghe is drawing the interest of political parties in Sri Lanka to make a deeper study of the Dual Citizenship disqualification for those seeking elections to public office. As they see it, the restriction introduced with the 19th Amendment, has prevented those holding Dual Citizenship from contesting parliamentary elections. There is thinking that this should be extended to other elections, especially to the Provincial Councils and the Executive Presidency. There is the thinking that if a Dual Citizen is unsuitable to be elected to Parliament, such a person should also be unsuitable for elections to Provincial Councils and the Executive Presidency, two positions that can be influenced by one’s ‘other’ citizenship in the conduct of one’s duty, which can be anti-national.
They believe the government should consider further amendments to the Constitution and Elections Laws to ensure that this restriction is extended, and suggest a careful study of the Australian Constitution in this regard. The relevant Section 44 states:
Any person who - (i.) Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power:
(iv.) Holds any office of profit under the Crown, or any pension payable during the pleasure of the Crown out of any of the revenues of the Commonwealth - shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.
The Australian Election Commission reproduces the sections in its Candidates Handbook, where it draws particular attention to S 44 (i) and (iv). As to the nomination form, it advises that to give “false or misleading information”, or to “omit any information if omitting that information would be misleading”, is a criminal offence and that the “maximum penalty for this offence is imprisonment for 12 months”.
They propose that the Elections Commission would also look into this aspect of necessary change to the Electoral Laws, and restrictions on nominations.
SAITM positive
The announcement by the Committee of Vice Chancellors of State Universities that it sees the latest government proposal on SAITM can be “accepted as positive and constructive” could be a major move to resolving this issue that has dragged on for far too long.
They state that since a positive situation has been created for all medical students of state universities to continue their education and clinical training, the students engage in their academic work with immediate effect.
The Vice Chancellors have made their statement having thoroughly considered the harmful impact made on the Health Sector due to the absence of students from their academic work in all State Medical Faculties during the past number of months, as well as the uncertainties created on the future of medical students.
The Vice Chancellors’ statement comes after the GMOA too made welcome announcement of the new proposal for a non-profit making SAITM institution to proceed with medical education. However, the medical students of the eight medical faculties continue their boycott of lectures and clinical training, calling for the nationalization of SAITM. The Government will soon have to take the necessary steps to drive any possible sense to the minds of these student union leaders, asking them to give ear to what the Vice Chancellors say. 
Add new comment