By Rasika Jayakody

A Cabinet minister, who joined the national government two weeks ago along with a group of SLFP MPs, last week, gave a telephone call to a young Parliamentarian who attended the meeting which was held in Rathnapura to support former President Rajapaksa. The Minister asked his young party colleague as to why he decided to attend the meeting in Rathnapura. The minister was curious to know the reason they violated the decision made by the Central Committee of the party preventing party members from attending events organized by other political parties.

“Look. I am 100 percent sure that the UNP will hold the next Parliamentary election under the present electoral system. They will somehow block the first-past-the-post system as it is disadvantageous to them. When we go for the election, we need votes. If we don’t attend meetings to support Mahinda, his supporters in our districts will not vote for us. Who’s going to look after us? Our focus in on the election! Not on the so called bans imposed by the Central Committee,” the Parliamentarian replied.

This more or less encapsulates the sentiments of the MPs who express support to Mahinda Rajapaksa at this point. They are aware of the fact that they can cash in on Mahinda Rajapaksa’s 5.8 million vote bank if they align themselves with Pro-Rajapaksa campaign ahead of the election. As much as they want to be seen with the pro-Rajapaksa campaign, they also want to make sure that they contest under the UPFA ticket at the next election with the support of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party. They expect hardcore MR supporters to vote for them at the next election with the belief that they will help the former President to come back to the political arena, probably as the leader of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party.

Will MR divide SLFP for his own benefit?

However, what is clear at this point is a simmering crisis in the Sri Lanka Freedom Party ahead of a crucial parliamentary election where every political party is vying to increase their ‘share’ in Parliament. Former President Rajapaksa confidently claims that he will not cause any division in the SLFP. But, it is quite evident that through his ‘pawns’, Rajapaksa is trying to create a division in the SLFP in a bid to create a pro-Rajapaksa bloc that will assist him in regaining the top post of the party in the future.

Throughout his long political career, Rajapaksa has demonstrated on several occasions that he is not reluctant to align himself with dissidents and ‘rebels’ of the party for his own benefits. When he first entered the country’s legislature in 1970 from Beliatta defeating Dr. Ranjith Atapattu, Rajapaksa was called the ‘baby’ of the seventh Parliament as he was just 24 years old. He was a mere backbencher in Parliament and was not given any key position by the late Sirimavo Bandaranaike who was then the party leader.

In 1977, Rajapaksa was thrown out of Parliament as Ranjith Atapattu regained his ‘Beliatta seat’ with a majority of 6300 votes. The Sri Lanka Freedom Party was reduced to eight seats in Parliament and the party even lost the Opposition Leader as it went to TULF Leader A. Amirthalingam. Maithripala Senanayake, Lakshman Jayakody, S. D. Bandaranayake, Anura Bandaranaike, M. Haleem Ishak, Richard Pathirana, Amarasiri Dodangoda and Ananda Dassanayake were the MPs representing the Sri Lanka Freedom Party during the post-1977 period.

Rajapaksa, the young politician from Beliatta, was not in the limelight during the toughest time of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party. Although he was not a significant character, he had a close relationship with Anura Bandaranaike who, in the early 80s, rebelled against the leadership of his mother, the late Sirimavo Bandaranaike. When the late Sirimavo Bandaranaike was deprived of her civic rights in 1980, Anura-Maithri group claimed that a person who did not have civic rights should not remain as the party leader.

Mahinda Rajapaksa, probably due to his close friendship with Anura Bandaranaike, was seen as a supporter of this campaign. They held meetings with grassroots level activists of the party claiming the SLFP leadership should be changed. It was widely known among political circles that during the early 80s, Rajapaksa referred to Anura Bandaranaike as “lokka”.

During the presidential election campaign in 1982, SLFP presidential candidate Hector kobbekaduwa was not supported by the group led by Anura Bandaranaike and Maitripala Senanayake. In fact addressing a meeting in Balangoda, Anura Bandaranaike said the SLFP’s presidential candidate Kobbekaduwa was a ‘contractor’ and he would hand over the post of President to the leader of the party.

This remark went viral and it damaged the entire election campaign of the SLFP in an irreparable manner. It was former President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga and her husband Vijaya Kumaratunga who were the key speakers of Hector Kobbekaduwa’s election campaign. Even during the early 80s, Rajapaksa and CBK belonged to two rival camps within the SLFP.

Mahinda Rajapaksa’s younger brother Basil Rajapaksa too was a member of this rebel group , which also included Stanley Tilekeratne and J.R.P. Suriyapperuma. When Anura Bandaranaike was the head of the SLFP Youth Wing, Basil Rajapaksa was the Secretary of the same organization and he was dubbed by many as the “bosom-pal” of the ‘prince’ of the Bandaranaike family. He was also chosen as the General Secretary in Maithripala Senanayake’s SLFP (M) group which challenged the leadership of the ‘official’ leader of the party.

During the referendum in 1982, Basil Rajapaksa actually campaigned with the UNP in support of the postponement of the general election, allowing the UNP to secure its overwhelming majority in Parliament for six more years. Basil ultimately obtained the UNP membership and famously claimed at a press conference that the votes received by Hector Kobbekaduwa in the 1982 presidential election were those received from die-hard SLFP voters and no other political parties supported Kobbekaduwa’s candidacy. It was clear that he was hell-bent on ridiculing the Sri Lanka Freedom Party and its presidential candidate.

At the same press conference, Mahinda Rajapaksa’s brother said that the SLFP ‘only believed in restrictions and failed to interact on economic issues with the rest of the world’ could ‘never rule a nation’ nor ‘lead a country towards prosperity. He also accused his party of following a culture of rationing essentials like sugar and chillies” with the excuse given being that both these items if taken in excess could prove detrimental to the nation’s health. In spite of his brother’s hate-campaign against the SLFP, Mahinda Rajapaksa remained with his party and maintained his “alliance” with Anura Bandaranaike.

Another highlight of his tumultuous political career was the by-election of Mulkirigala in which his elder brother Chaman Rajapaksa contested as the SLFP candidate. The election was characterized with violence and it was a blatant display of ‘fire-power’. Mahinda Rajapaksa, who was helping his brother’s election campaign, was arrested in connection with a shooting incident in Mulkirigala and was remanded for three months.

It was later revealed that Rajapaksa cell-mate was an Australian smuggler. The Australian national had asked the youthful politician what he would be doing when he left prison, to which Rajapaksa had said “go back to politics”. In response, the Aussie had said he would “go back to smuggling” after his time in prison.

Towards the late 80s, amidst intensified violence in the North and South, Rajapaksa turned himself into a human rights activist who was strongly critical of the conduct of the then UNP government. He, along with Vasudewa Nanayakkara, went to the extent of informing the Human Rights Council in Geneva of gross human rights violations in Sri Lanka. He was also a harsh critique of the Indo-Lanka accord in 1987 which saw the setting up of Provincial Councils in the country.

Speaking to international media on the presence of the Indian Army in Sri Lanka, Rajapaksa, at that point, expressed fears that they might come to the “South” and occupy other parts of the country too! It was against this backdrop that he was relected to Parliament from the Hambanthota district under the newly introduced PR system. During this period, Mahinda Rajapaksa developed a close friendship with Mangala Samaraweera, another young MP of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party who was campaigning for the rights of the youth and the mothers who lost their children due to violence. Rajapaksa was also involved with the Mothers’ Front , formed by Dr. Manoranee Saravanamuttu, the mother of the late Richard de Zoysa who was killed in 1990 under tragic circumstances.

In the early 90s, Rajapaksa ran into another confrontation with CBK when he organized the “Pada Yathra” from Colombo to Kataragama against the then UNP government in the aftermath of the 88-89 insurrection. When Kumaratunga joined the march in Matara, Rajapaksa, who was the main organizer of the “pada yathra” campaign scolded her in public using foul language. As a result, Bandaranaike went back to Colombo without taking part in the ‘Pada Yathra’ campaign.

Mahinda Rajapaksa faced a tough time when Anura Bandaranaike crossed over to the UNP and Chandrika Kumaratunga became the Prime Ministerial candidate of the SLFP. Under CBK’s government, Rajapaksa received a relatively less important ministerial portfolio as the Minister of Labour and Vocational Training. It was widely known among political circles that he was often at the receiving end of the former President’s ire.

Recently, the former President went on to claim that Rajapaksa worked secretly with the UNP to topple her government in 2001, after which he was appointed as the leader of the opposition. During his stint as the Opposition Leader, Rajapaksa was dubbed by the JVP as the “Opposition Leader of the government” as he did not resort to stringent action against the then UNP government.

Former Propaganda Secretary of the JVP, Wimal Weerawansa was also among those who called Rajapaksa as the Opposition Leader of the government. Such remarks were quite similar to the remarks made by some quarters of the UPFA on Nimal Siripala de Silva, the present leader of the opposition.

Therefore, if the history of the Rajapaksas is something to go by, it is evident that the former President will not be reluctant to cause a division in the party to benefit his political agenda. However, there is a sizable proportion of party seniors who are trying to avoid a division in the party ahead of the next election.

“The biggest challenge we have to face at this point is the possibility of a division,” a senior Parliamentarian of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party, who recently accepted a ministerial portfolio from the ‘national unity government’ told the Daily News.

“If the government announces a Parliamentary election right now, we are not in a position to win it,” he admitted. “However,” he said, “if we can get the election postponed until October and if we can protect the party from divisions, we are in a position to win the next Parliamentary election under the new electoral system,” he added.

That is one reason why there is a tug of war between the SLFP and the UNP on introducing simultaneous electoral reforms along with the 19th Amendment. The UNP is of the view that the forthcoming Parliamentary election cannot be held under the new electoral system due to time-constrains. Due to this difference of opinion, the proposed constitutional amendment has now hit a fresh snag.

“In principle, we agree with electoral reforms and at the Working Committee meeting last week, Prime Minister Wickremesinghe informed the WC members that 20th Amendment will be presented to Parliament before the end of April. We can present the electoral reforms to Parliament and get it passed. But, there are certain areas that we need to work on and it consumes more time. We only have a mandate to remain in the government for a period of 100 days and we need to seek a fresh mandate after that. So, the next election cannot be held under the new electoral system,” a Working Committee member of the UNP told the Daily News on Monday.

SLFP and UNP now in a dilemma

It is clear that the SLFP is in a dilemma over the 19th Amendment to the constitution. Multiple spokespersons of the SLFP have already claimed that the party is not on the same page with the UNP with regard to the 19th Amendment, although they act as stakeholders of a national government. The SLFP, with the support of the JHU, is likely to come up with interim proposals on the constitutional amendment and that will, in all likelihood, create a fresh issue with the UNP. The SLFP’s main argument is that through the constitutional amendment the UNP is attempting to usurp the powers of the President, turning him into what they term as a ‘puppet’.

It is quite interesting to analyze the stance of the pro-Rajapaksa group on the 19th amendment. From a strategic point of view, they should support the empowerment of the Prime Minister as that will ultimately buttress their campaign to make Mahinda Rajapaksa the Prime Ministerial candidate of the SLFP. The implementation of the 19th Amendment will strengthen Mahinda Rajapaksa’s position if and when he becomes the Prime Minister. In the absence of the 19th Amendment, Rajapaksa will have to be subservient to the incumbent President even if he becomes the Prime Minister.

Interestingly, even the members of the pro-Rajapaksa group have expressed negative sentiments about the 19th Amendment on the grounds that it allows the Prime Minister to usurp the powers of the democratically elected president. Pro-Sirisena group of the SLFP and the JHU also criticize the 19th Amendment on the same basis. They have already indicated that they will defeat the 19th Amendment if the government attempts to pass it in Parliament without amendments. This suggests that the proposed amendment may fail to secure two thirds majority in Parliament.

“In that case, the UNP would push for immediate dissolution of Parliament as it is the last resort,” UNP General Secretary Minister Kabir Hashim told the Daily News on Sunday.

“It is up to the SLFP and the JHU to decide whether they should respect the people’s mandate or not. Our duty is to present the 19th Amendment and push for much needed constitutional changes. Those who want to stand in the way of this process should realise that they are going against the people’s mandate,” Minister Hashim said.

“The people wanted constitutional amendments. They voted for that. If the process does not happen, the people will give their verdict at the Parliamentary election,” he also added.

Meanwhile, another Parliamentarian of the UNP categorically denied the claim that the Prime Minister was trying to usurp the presidential powers through the constitutional amendment. “According to the proposed amendment, President is the Head of the State, Head of Military and even appoint the Prime Minister. Prime Minister is the Head of the Government.

This is the most important system in Cabinet government system. This is what was proposed in the 100 day programme and it is in accordance with the Westminster tradition. What has to be realized that the Prime Minister’s position as the head of the government is not artificially created by the proposed constitutional amendment. In the absence of such measures the present presidential system will continue without hindrance. It is this process of democratization that has drawn criticism from the Jathika Hela Urumaya.

If we retain the Executive Presidency, it will amount to a betrayal of the people who voted for a ‘change’. It is now becoming quite evident that only those who are dreaming to be a president in the future will want one person to be the Head of the Government and Head of State. In a realistic sense, the best and most progressive check and balance is to have two different personalities one to be the Head of the State while the other to be the head of the Cabinet and the government.

The post of President will not be a ceremonial one, but will be assigned with specific duties such as ensuring that constitutional bodies respect the constitutional provisions. Good governance will be his main responsibility and will enjoy powers to act as a check on other agencies,” he explained.
However, the matter is now running into a deadlock with each party vehemently opposing the viewpoints of the other. This has now created a sense of uncertainly among political circles about the future of the country’s politics.

Courtesy:Daily News