Sudath Gunasekara 21.8.2015

To me the so-called National list concept is a big fraud. In this country it appears to be a combination of the Machiavellian and Kautilyan strategies in state craft with a pinch of salt from JRJ’S political cunningness and acumen. So one can just imagine what kind of vicious political invention it would be. This Sri Lankan invention is the most undemocratic mechanism designed by any to subvert and rob the people’s mandate and install the dictatorship of the politician. It goes even further to the extent of a total negation of the people’s sovereignty which is said to be inalienable at the beginning of the Constitution in article 3.

Looking at the development of this idea in this country, the 1987 Constitution provided for 196 seats in Parliament. In 1988, by the 14 A (24^th May 1988) it was increased to 225 as stated in article 99a. But I could not find the words ‘national list members’ under any article or section therein other than in the heading appearing before the Short title of 14^th A given below.

(‘The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka extended the immunity of the President, increased the number of MPs to 225, provided a 1/8 (12.5%) cut-off for parliamentary representation, and dealt with Delimitation Commission, referendums and national list members. The amendment came into effect on 24 May 1988’.)

Again within 6 months on 17 Dec 1988, 99a of 14^th A was repealed by the 15^th Amendment and a new mechanism was introduced. Provision for defeated members to be appointed is included in the latter part of para 3 article 8A under the 14^th A, most probably on second thought, to take in men rejected by the people but indispensable for the leadership, for various shady reasons. The fact that none in Parliament appears to have objected this underhand provision clearly shows that all the politicians harp on the same common denominator, that is their own survival and self interest rather than the interest of the people. The hurry with which this amendment was passed and the confusion associated further proves their hidden intention behind this provision. That is why I call this provision one of the most undemocratic, unethical and uncivilized constitutional provisions invented by any Parliament anywhere in the world that has humiliated the voter and robbed his fundamental democratic right to elect a desirable and reject an undesirable politician. If you carefully go through the list of people who have been nominated under this provision from the inception you will see what I am trying to say here.  I don’t think you need further proof than the UPFA list just submitted to testify this argument.

The rising public protest and outcry on this issue spearheaded by prominent members of the Mahasangha such as Maduluwave Sobitha Thera clearly shows public disapproval of this mala fide decision taken by the President

‘Rejects are rejects” this is how the Island Editor calls defeated candidates proposed to be appointed to Parliament via the National list in his forthright Editorial of 21^st Aug 2015. Not only I, but all sensible people in this country fully agree with you Prabath. Well said and well done. Your editorial is revealing and it should be read by everybody in this country. I suggest you get the Sinhala Divaina to publish it in Sinhala without fail because they are the people who should get this message, although the President and JVP appear to think otherwise. JVP has appointed  Handunhetti and the President Sirisena appointed S.B. Dissanayaka, Vijitamuni Soysa and five others from among defeated candidates to the so-called National list, which I would call an anti-national list out right. Though the 14^th A to the Constitution under Sec 8, rather deceptively and undemocratically has made provision for defeated candidates to be appointed to Parliament via the national list, I don’t think one need to continue with this mala fide invention. Though our politicians have numerous ways of humiliating the voters I would say this is the most heinous and treacherous among them. It is undemocratic, unethical, deceptive, dishonest, hypocritical and shameless and it also shatters the very foundation of representative democracy.

The National List (NL) mechanism was originally introduced in 1988 that provided for 29 places out of 225 in Parliament as said before. No qualifications for the national list members have been laid down in the Constitution, although provision for defeated candidates has been introduced under Sec 8 of the14th A, perhaps on second thought. The architects of the Constitution may have left it open and flexible to enable them to name legitimately anyone whom they want. This lack of clarity and flexibility alone shows the hidden agenda they had in mind when they added this provision. The so-called national list is submitted at the time of handing over nominations. Usually it is meant for people with brains and distinguished track records who do not like to enter the fray but whose contribution is very valuable for good governance. Their public image and stature is used as a bait to catch voters. If any party drops those already listed and appoint new people or defeated men and women on second thought for political expedisncy, in the first place, it betrays and rejects the voter who cast his /her vote on the presumption that at least few men of character and education in the said list will be there in Parliament. Secondly definitely representative democracy becomes a big joke with such intruders and rejects being introduced subsequently. Appointing defeated people makes it still worse. Because it tantamount to a total disregard of the people’s vote and their will. No civilized society should allow politicians to murder democracy in broad day light in this manner to fulfill their sinister wants.

As the Island Editor further says those who vote for a particular political party at parliamentary polls, endorse its NL. Therefore, using the mechanism to appoint candidates rejected by the voters as MPP on second thought is tantamount to a distortion of the will of the electorate”.

Meanwhile I also fully endorse the Editors comment that ‘the UNP’s decision against appointing political rejects to Parliament via the NL is to be highly commended”.

‘Appointment of some of the defeated UPFA candidates in the good books of President Maithripala Sirisena to Parliament through the NL’, as he further says is also deplorable and undemocratic. This is neither democracy no maîtree or yahapalanaya in practice by any standards.

Polls monitors also have condemned the appointment of defeated candidates. ‘A candidate fails to get elected at a general election because voters do not consider him or her fit enough to enter Parliament’.  So under what democratic principle or ethical or moral criterion such people are appointed to Parliament making use of a dirty loophole in the Constitution.

As the Island editorial has correctly pointed out there is no difference between admitting a student who fails to obtain enough marks at the GCE A/L to a national university and appointing to the national legislature via the NL a candidate who loses an election. Therefore, no one who claims to be a proponent of good governance can endorse the appointment of political rejects to Parliament through the backdoor’.

This type of political chess game in Sri Lanka is no surprise to Sri Lankan people because they know very well the Constitution itself is not designed to safeguard the interests of the people. In other words it is not a people’s constitutions. It is a politicians Constitution drafted behind doors by the politicians for the benefit of politicians.   If you peruse through it carefully you will see how craftily they have masterminded it to safeguard their interests so that they can make use of it to run a Government by the politicians for the politicians and of the politicians”.  It is designed to safeguard the rights of politicians at every point. This applies to the number of MPP as well as all other aspects such as the election process and enormous privileges granted to politicians like a fat pension within five years. This is why I always argue for a new constitution that safeguards the interests of the people as the first priority. Nevertheless unlike in previous times people should demand that their views are also entertained and embodied in the final document.

First this concept originated as appointed MPP. For example 1948 constitution provided for 6 appointed MPP to provide for the appointment of ‘persons who have rendered distinguished public service or are persons of eminence in professional, commercial, industrial or agricultural life including education, law, medicine science, engineering and banking’. It provided an avenue for eminent persons to enter Parliament without contesting elections which they detest’. But, today sadly, it is used by political parties to appoint any crook or even defeated candidates to the national legislature. At present the list is used only to select the favourites of the political party leadership who can never get in to Parliament through elections. These MPP are mainly used to increase the voting strength and not for any worthy contribution they make. You will see this clearly if you go through the past lists of national list MPP in our Parliament.

The most dangerous part of this process is that they don’t represent the people. They represent only the person who has appointed them and his interests. It follows then that they are answerable and obliged only to the party leadership who appoint them. Rejects are rejects as the Editor says and therefore such people should never be accommodated in the National list. Such accommodations will tantamount to nullification of the people’s democratic right to elect a person they prefer. Such action leads to a complete erosion of the people’s right to franchise and democracy become a joke. Therefore everybody who value democratic principle should vehemently oppose this move. I wonder as to how the Commissioner of Elections declare such people as elected under sec 8 of the 14th A when they have been rejected  and are only actually selected by the Leader of the party. I am surprised as to how one can call this representative democracy.

In my opinion not only defeated persons at elections should not be nominated to Parliament but they also should never be appointed to any other public post at Home or abroad. I reiterate this point as there is a habit of such defeated people being appointed as Ambassadors and Chairmen of corporations etc.

I wish eminent civil society leaders like Rev Maduluwave Sobitha Thera will take up this matter seriously as a national priority and try to convince the political hierarchy not to nominate any political reject to the national list. Secondly to do away with this national list concept that has become an instrument of political expediency rather than a mechanism of public necessity.

Mr President People in this country have voted you on Jan 8 to restore good Governance. Appointing a bunch of sycophants, who have been rejected by the people to Parliament and dropping people like GLP, Dew, Vitarana and Rajiev, from the list, jut to hurt MR  or to take revenge from those who supported him is neither good governance no maîtree Governance either.