Comments on: Mahinda Rajapaksa cannot become Prime Minister

By: Sahan

Sahan — Thu, 06 Aug 2015 14:29:00 +0000

Mahinda Rajapakse MUST become prime minister and Mahinda Rajapakse WILL DEFINITlY become prime minister !!! thats all !!

By: Independent

Independent — Tue, 04 Aug 2015 06:56:00 +0000

Jayalath says there will not be a stable government.
There may not be a majority government, but a good and stable government will come out of that. There is no point having a stable but notorious government – it would be hell on earth. But surely JVP will support good policies of a minority government and so are the TNA , SLMP etc. Bad policies will not be able to be passed. Australia has a stable minority government for 4 years.
It is a good governance we should be longing for, be it minority government.

By: Independent

Independent — Tue, 04 Aug 2015 05:16:00 +0000

Rajapakse is pretending his Sinhala Buddhist image only to grab power.

Can anyone here tell me what is the difference between UFPA and UNP election manifestos ?

UNP has stated it will work towards power devolution to “the
maximum” which is possible within a unitary Sri Lanka and which is acceptable
to all. Similar words have been used in
the LLRC recommendations. UNP has also promised a new constitution, but for
that they need 2/3 parliamentary majority which is unlikely.

UPFA election manifesto has stated that it will come up with
a political solution within the 13th Amendment and this time, clearly
stating it is not going beyond it. It
has also promised implementation of LLRC recommendations within a year.

This means there is no difference in policy between two
parties. All indications point towards the steadfast stay of 13th
amendment which states in black and white that there are Tamil speaking areas
and Sinhala speaking areas and the possibility of merger of North and East
provinces which is clearly based on racial based divisions within the country.
If all LLRC recommendations are implemented there will not be ANY difference
between UNP and UPFA viz. the following being implemented within a year.

A good-faith effort should be taken to develop a
consensus on power devolution, building on what exists – both, for maximum
possible devolution to the periphery, as well as power sharing at the centre.

Learning of each other’s languages should be
made a compulsory part of the school curriculum.

All Government offices should have
Tamil-speaking officers at all times. Police Stations should have bi-lingual
officers on a 24-hour basis.

A proactive policy should be implemented to
encourage mixed schools serving children from different ethnic and religious
backgrounds.

Government should engage with the so-called
‘hostile diaspora groups’ constructively and address their concerns.

National anthem should be sung simultaneously in
two languages to the same tune.

Laws should be strictly enforced on the
instances of hate speech that contributes to communal disharmony.

A separate event should be set apart on the
National Day (4 February) to express solidarity and empathy with all victims of
the tragic conflict and pledge the collective commitment to ensure that there
should never be such blood-letting in the country again.

This is what Rajapakse is saying in “black and white”. But his cohorts screamed when the current president allowed National Anthem in Tamil. Hypercritic thieves should be chased out this time. I am sure Rakapakse will sell the country to stop his family being prosecuted. He will definitely give a Federal Solution and joint with TNA despite his promises to come to power. Watch out Metteyya ! He will completely get rid of Buddhism from Sri Lanka !.
What is important is if Rajapakse the “known devil” returns, there will not be any “Thovile” again to chase the devil.

By: David Blacker

David Blacker — Mon, 03 Aug 2015 13:35:00 +0000

it is unlikely that MS could pass over MR for the PM office if the latter’s party does indeed command a majority and the man has a sufficient number of preferential votes. regardless of the interpretation of the constitution in favour of the British practice over the Sri Lankan executive power. it would be undemocratic and likely to lead to an impeachment of MS; to say nothing of national unrest.

while the constitution declares that an individual who has been twice elected as president cannot be elected for a third term (or in fact stand for election in a presidential race), the appointment of the PM as an acting president isn’t by election (public or parliamentary) but by constitutional decree; ie by appointment.

however, as i read it, the constitution states “2)The provisions of the Constitution (other than the provisions of paragraph (2) of Article 32) shall apply, insofar as they can be applied, to a person acting in the office of President,” or in other words, that the same conditions that apply to a prospective president, apply to an acting president. which still leaves the loophole of the acting president being appointed and not elected, allowing MR to be acting president if necessary.

if, however, the Supreme Court were to interpret the two-term ban being a ban on holding the office of president and not just being elected to it, then that would preclude MR from being even an acting president. and if that were the case, is it ethical to appoint an individual to the office of PM knowing full well, from the outset, that he cannot carry out all the duties of said office (in this case, the duty as acting for the president)? if no, then that would make it impossible for MR to hold the office of either PM or Speaker. if the SC interprets it by the letter rather the spirit, however, then there is no legal barrier for MR to be PM or acting president.

By: Metteyya Brahmana

Metteyya Brahmana — Sat, 01 Aug 2015 21:06:00 +0000

In reply to Nanasath.

The writer of the above article has a totally juvenile view of the constitution. The 19th Amendment only bars election more than twice for a ‘particular’ position, and this does NOT include Prime Minister. Under this writer’s analysis, Ranil Wickramasinghe would ALSO be disqualified, as he has held the Prime Minister position twice already.

A general election is the only time the people of Sri Lanka get a voice in who is going to lead their country in Parliament and in the Prime Minister position by giving that party and their presumptive Prime Minister candidate a majority of their votes. Maithripala must respect that voice or he will be attempting to overturn the democratic will of the people.

Part of the rationale for the 19th Amendment is to rid ourselves of dictatorial tendencies that ignore the will of the majority of the people. By reading the constitution in a dictatorial manner that places the ‘subjective’ opinion of the president above the will of the people, Sri Lanka takes a giant step backward from democracy and essentially becomes a dictatorship. The ‘objective’ opinion of the president can only be based on polling Parliament and deferring to the majority in Parliament concerning who they want as Prime Minister.

By: Ranjani de Silva Kumarawadu

Ranjani de Silva Kumarawadu — Sat, 01 Aug 2015 11:57:00 +0000

It is admitted that there are strong arguments for and against this
issue. There is no one right answer in these areas of uncertainty of law; only answers. As one jurist has said
‘only ‘success succeeds,’ in this type of situations. We must ponder whether it would succeed, if the President appoints a MP who does not command the confidence of the House. It is very likely the government would not be able to proceed with their work, as it happened just before the dissolution of the last Parliament.. One could envisage votes of no confidence being passed against ministers or the PM himself/herself. The work of the
government would come to a standstill. It would perhaps ‘then ‘necessitate a presidential rule’ ignoring the Parliament which in turn would lead to civil unrest. I do not think we Sri Lankans wish to be in that situation.

Rananii Kumarawadu

By: Jayalath 22

Jayalath 22 — Sat, 01 Aug 2015 09:18:00 +0000

If Rajspaksa can secure the majority in the parliament who can claim for the priministerial post inevitably ,but I cannot see that any one could secure majority. So, this is what Sirisena wanted and he did it . He is entirely responsible for what he did . He will never ever be the one who should evade from being punished for that . It is up to tomorrow how he should pay for it . I’m pretty sure all will come after the election . Sirisena’s blunders and hypocrisy destroyed the stable and steadily forwarded country . That’s why Ranil is asking for majority to form a stable government . So, all are evidence to prove we are gone backwards. I strongly believe that this situation is the beginning of end of the country. And what west and others are needed is absolutely happening today .

By: Nishad Shaheid

Nishad Shaheid — Sat, 01 Aug 2015 03:19:00 +0000

The title should read, “Mahinda Rajapakse SHOULD not become prime minister “, not “Mahinda Rajapakse cannot become prime minister”.

By: Nanasath

Nanasath — Sat, 01 Aug 2015 01:08:00 +0000

This is a flawed analysis. The law does not prevent a person who was twice before elected by the people from becoming Prime Minister. Nor does it prevent a person who was twice elected by the people from being being a care taker president until Parliament elects a president for the remainder of the term upon the death, disability, resignation or impeachment of the president.

Mr.Hameed has it completely wrong about the objective of the disqualification imposed by Article 31(2). It is not as he says to “to bar him from exercising the powers of that office”. Its a constitutional safeguard against a person from using the powers of the office to continue to stay in that office.

One could even argue in the case of Mr. Rajapaksa, he is the least able to use the powers of the office of the President to prolong his stay in office, not because of his political history or behavior. But the law prevents him through Article 30(2).