Degeneration of Parliament

In an architectural point of view, Sri Lanka had a Parliament building with a majestic look, which was most appropriate and fitting for a Parliament, near the Galle Face. The affairs of the old Parliament were carried out in this building, in an optimum manner from 28th January 1930 when it was opened up to the time it was shifted to the new Parliament Complex at Sri Jayewardenepura Kotte on 24th March 1982. The new Parliament complex despite being equipped with modern amenities and having an artistic look, lacks the majestic appearance that a parliament should have. Presumably, this difference can be said to have symbolically signified the downward journey of the parliament.A similar thing of symbolic significance had happened to the judiciary as well.

From an architectural angle, Sri Lanka had an equally imposing judicial complex with a fine finesse appropriate for an institution which metes out justice. But, in the eighties, the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal were shifted to a new court complex built in Hulftsdorp itself .Although it is equipped with modern facilities, the exterior of it can be said to resemble a beautiful Chinese lantern.

Japan cannot be regarded as a country which had a good history of democracy in the long past; it was quite recently that it became a democratic country.Similarly; China too, did not have a good history as far as the subject of judiciary is concerned. The shifting of buildings can be said to have served as a symbol depicting the subsequent decline of the two institutions namely the Sri Lanka Parliament and the Judiciary.

What is more important in parliament is the authority it exercises as the supreme institute of the State rule, legislation and policy formulation and above all to what extent it has discharged its responsibilities, than the buildings of the parliament and the facilities and amenities available. Similarly, the importance of the judiciary is dependent upon the extent to which it had performed its supervisory role in monitoring the activities of the Legislature and the Executive, in addition to effective exercise of justice in ordinary legal proceedings.

Attack on Parliament

The Parliament came under severe attack on two occasions following it was shifted to Jayewardenepura Kotte. The first attack took place on August 18, 1987 while all the MPs of the ruling party including the President and the Cabinet of Ministers had been engaged in a discussion on Indo-Lanka Accord. The first grenade was hurled at the table in which President J.R. Jayawardene was seated. It rolled over the carpeted floor and exploded. The second grenade went over the heads of those sitting at the table, fell on an empty seat on the left, fell to the ground and exploded. Miraculously, President Jayewardene was unharmed. However, Kirti Abeywickrema, a District Minister died while Lalith Athulathmudali, National Defence Minister was seriously injured.

It was an attack made by a supporter of the JVP aimed at destroying the group of ruling party MPs .Twenty years later, on January 21, 2020, a parliamentarian made a frightening verbal attack, on the floor of the parliament, disclosing the current deplorable state of the parliament, which can be considered a far more devastating attack than the previous grenade attack. The recent verbal attack made by MP Ranjan Ramanayaka can be said to have deprived the Parliament of its political legitimacy and sounded the death knell of the Sri Lankan parliament.

According to Ranjan, there are 100 liquor license holders, 04 Ethanol license holders, 75 sand license holders and 01 license holder for horse racing among the parliamentarians.

The data presented by Ranjan are not perfect. There are MPs possessing more than one liquor license. His list does not include the number of MPs possessing rubble permits, timber permits, passenger transport permits, the number that had acquired state lands, obtained re-export permits, filling stations and government contracts in various ways and the number that had acquired licences for Radio and TV frequencies. We can obtain a clear picture of the extent of degeneration of the Parliament only when these deficiencies are completed and the list updated. In this backdrop, the present parliament can be described as an illegitimate institution comprised of MPs, a vast majority of them are not entitled, both legally and ethically, to serve as parliamentarians.

Loss of conscience

Although the general public of Sri Lanka is unaware of the legal aspects of these issues, Ranjan’s speech seems to have flabbergasted the people. Surprisingly the authorities of Parliament were not seemed to be concerned and shaken by this speech. Neither the Speaker, nor anyone representing the parliament has come forward demanding an inquiry into the matter to safeguard the dignity of the Parliament. The Speaker had not stressed the need for going for an investigation. Similarly, both the ruling party and the opposition have refrained from making such a request. In other words, none of the political parties, big or small, representing the parliament, made any attempt to present a proposal to investigate this serious allegation.

What does it indicate? Although the degeneration of Parliament remains a secret to the country, it has not been so to the authorities of Parliament and the MPs.They all knew the extent of degeneration .They have got used to it , the repulsive stink emanating from it and the putrid leachate oozing out of it . They had got themselves acclimatized to this ugly condition and acquired the ability to live through it without any sense of disgrace so long as it remained a secret from the public. So much so, what Ranjan had disclosed was nothing new to them. Perhaps, it might have pricked them with a slight feeling of shame as this disclosure was made in public. Yet, one cannot expect that it had caused a big shock in them.

Apparently, none of them had the courage to demand for an inquiry as, almost every one of them, to a lesser or greater degree are likely to be affected and become guilty. This shows that Sri Lanka’s parliament is not only degenerated but had lost its conscience as well.

Legal status

Although Sri Lanka had adopted two constitutions, one in 1972 and the other 1978 subsequent to the enactment of Soulbury Constitution, there was no legislation enacted in both these constitutions in regard to the contracts entered into with the government by the MPs.However, both constitutions specifically state that the provisions in the Soulbury Constitution are valid unless and until new laws are enacted in regard to this issue. Therefore, Article 13 (3) (c) of the Soulbury Constitution is presumed to be the valid law for this subject. This position had been confirmed by two previous judgments passed by the Supreme Court , one in respect of MP Albert Silva (Dahanayake v. De Silva 1978/79/80 18 LR-41) & the other against MP Rajitha Senaratne (2000-2SLR-79).

The Article 13 (3) (c) of the Soulbury Constitution is as follows.

“A person shall be disqualified for being elected or appointed as a Senator or a member of the House of Representative or for sitting or voting in the Senate or House of Representative if he, directly or indirectly by himself or by any person on his behalf or for his use or benefit, holds or enjoys any right or benefit under any contract made by on behalf of the Crown in respect of the Government of the Island for the furnishing or providing money to be remitted abroad or of goods or services to be used or employed in the service of the crown in the Island.”

Accordingly, a Member of Parliament cannot engage in any business transaction with the Government directly or indirectly and on behalf of him or any other member of his family. It is not possible for him to buy or lease State land or other State property; cannot act as a government contractor or one who sells goods to the government or buys goods from the government.

The ugly compromise.

Any one who does such things cannot contest parliamentary elections; cannot get elected to Parliament; cannot sit or vote in Parliament. Under the circumstances, Sri Lanka's Parliament is in a serious crisis.The existence of Parliament is totally unconstitutional.A vast majority of Members of Parliament can be regarded as those who have committed the offences outlined above.Therefore, the Parliament of Sri Lanka can be considered a Legislative Council comprised of parliamentarians,the majority of whom are not qualified to represent the Parliament or sit and vote in the Parliament.

This is not a situation arisen recently or by accident. It can be described as an outcome of repulsive, unconstitutional actions initiated deliberately and had persisted over a considerable period of time, with consequential degrading and distorting of the entire parliamentary system.

Another important characteristic inherent in this horrific cancer is the consensus with which all parties and individuals that represents the Parliament act in the face of this ugly scenario, regardless of their position, class, ethnicity, religion or education. All of them can be said to have smeared tons of perfume at public expense to suppress the bad odour emanating from this putrid cancer.

The most surprising thing is the ignorance and the appalling silence of the intelligential and the public media of this ugly situation. Let alone the general public!

The 19th Amendment was intended to transfer all powers of the President to Parliament while keeping the degenerated state of Parliament as it is. I ventured to point out this situation when the idea of the amendment was first brought to the fore; but the intellectuals who appeared for the amendment lacked even the basic political intelligence to understand the situation. Just as the Presidential system established by President Jayewardene' was extremely corrupt, so was the parliamentary system built into the Presidential system of governance.Therefore,transfer of Presidential powers to Parliament or transfer of powers vested in Parliament by the 19th amendment back to the President, I should stress, will not be a solution to the degenerated situation of the system of governance.

JR's role

President Jayewardene can be considered the one who planted this horrible cancer in the country's political body. Although he was not a greedy person inclined in amassing wealth, the role played by him in corrupting the political system was immense. He pushed the government MPs into a corrupt stream and in the process he too, had dirt smeared on him. He did certain absurd changes in parliamentary traditions to please his MPs. He increased the allowances of MPs and introduced a system to give better vehicle to them. The most popular method that he adopted to please his MPs was to create a system so that they could obtain valuable State land at a nominal price.

The government owned more than one million acres of estate land divested under the Land Reform Act. It was this reserve of public land that was used to make the MPs of the ruling party, the landed proprietors. It would not be possible for him not to know that granting State land to MPs was contrary to the spirit of the constitution and the Parliamentary ethics.

This predatory program necessitated that its beneficiaries were stripped off their sense of shame and ethical values. Even if there was the slightest doubt or suspicion in them, President Jayewardene himself set an example exchanging a barren coconut estate of 50 acres owned by him with a fertile coconut land of 50 acres belonged to the Land Reform Commission. That was how the disgraceful plunder of land was commenced. Following the footsteps of the big boss, the ministers and MPs of the ruling party earmarked the fertile land that belonged to the Land Reform Commission and had them bought with the bungalows stood on them at a nominal price thereby becoming landed proprietors and planters. JR did a lot of things to the members of his family circle and his cronies, which were not superficially and at once visible. They too, can be treated as unconstitutional and degrading acts. It was he who started the system of setting up of museums for himself or his family members at government expense.

The Successors of JR

The Presidents who succeeded JR pursued the corrupt system introduced by him, by protecting and nurturing it and adding new elements to it. It was President Premadasa who initiated a system to offer radio broadcasts frequencies to his friends. President Chandrika introduced the system of granting liquor license to MPs.Thus, under this corrupt system, all Presidents with or without their knowledge allied themselves with the ruling party MPs and adopted a policy of plundering public property in the country.The number of liquor licenses issued to MPs during Chandrika's rule was more than 1,200.

There were certain MPs who had obtained four to five liquor licenses. While a large number of government MPs had become landed proprietors and planters under the regime of JR Jayewardene, a substantial number of government MPs had become bar owners under Chandrika's rule. The Presidents and powerful MPs used huge development schemes, large scale purchases and sales as important sources of income for them and earned large amounts of money. The process of looting public property and wealth moved forward rapidly leaving nothing left to be looted any more. The massive bond scam which every one knows is only one example. Paradoxically, when the country goes bankrupt, the political regime thrives getting richer.

In this backdrop, what is most tragic is the inability of the educated people of the country to understand the true nature of the plunder of the public treasures. At least, they were not aware that MPs transacting business with the government was a violation of the Constitution. The solution they foresaw to this problem was to send educated people or professionals to the Parliament. They failed to see the need for serious structural reforms for the system of governance.

Even after Ranjan's shocking revelation, they do not seem to have opened their eyes fully. They have not demanded an inquiry into the conduct of MPs who transact business with the Government. I haven't seen at least a single editorial written on it.

In a crisis situation like this, the role of the judiciary as well as the Auditor-General too should come under discussion.