13th Amendment – “For plus or minus, parties must participate in PSC”: Nimal

Irrigation and Water Resource Management Minister and Leader of the House of Parliament Nimal Siripala de Silva this year celebrates 30 years in politics. The lawyer-turned-politician speaks to the Daily FT about his political career, proposed amendments to the 13th Amendment and Northern Province elections.

Following are excerpts from the interview:

Q: Why did the Government decide to amend the 13th amendment?

A: That is a Government policy. The Government felt it was necessary at this stage to bring certain amendments to the Constitution. Still the nature and the scope of the amendments are being discussed at Cabinet level.

Q: You say it is Government policy, but we don’t see one voice within the Government regarding these amendments?

A: We are an alliance. If you take the Government of India, do you get one voice? We consist of several political parties which have various divergent views regarding devolution. One cannot expect all those political parties to raise the same voice. But when we reach a consensus, all the parties will be bound by that consensus and they will be with the Government. That is the nature of a coalition. If we take parties like the Jathika Hela Urumaya (JHU) and Jathika Nidahas Peramuna, their vote base and policies do not totally coincide with the policies of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP). In a coalition Government, we have to make certain compromises.

Q: Do you have the consent of all the SLFP members?

A: Of course, yes. The SLFP is in one voice. We have no problem.

Q: What happened to President Rajapaksa’s 13 plus?

A: The President once suggested a senate. Why don’t the TNA and the other parties come to the PSC and discuss the nature and the structure of the senate? If they want anything plus, why don’t they come and say that the 13th Amendment must be improved in certain ways? Without participating and without expressing their views at the proper forum, they cannot blame the Government.

Even the Government can propose anything, plus or minus, at the PSC proceedings. That is exactly why we are summoning the PSC. We have waited so long thinking that the UNP and the TNA would come and take part in the proceedings. We have appealed to them once again. But we cannot wait anymore.

Some allege that the amendments will remove the existing powers. But the truth is that there will be more power. While bringing these amendments I indicated to the party leaders that we would be reviving the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on devolution. We have been waiting for the United National Party and the Tamil National Alliance to come and take part in discussions. But today also I appealed them to nominate their members. If they don’t nominate other members, we will sit and discuss. In fact I appealed to the UNP also. They say they drafted a new constitution. Even that can be discussed within the PSC.

Whether we are deleting or adding, that has to be discussed within the PSC and arrive at a consensus. Without coming to the PSC, while waiting outside they cannot ask anything more or anything less. What we say is, come to the PSC and discuss this issue and convince the members that their proposals and amendments are good. If we can reach a consensus, then we can implement those proposals.

Q: The Indian External Affairs Minister has requested the Sri Lankan Government not to bring these amendments. The Sri Lankan External Affairs Minister too has assured that we will not go ahead with it. Your comments?

A: I am not aware of such a thing. That is a matter between the two Ministers.

Q: How can you say that there is an agreement between Sri Lanka and India?

A: We have appreciated the difficulty India is facing. We are sure that India also will understand the Sri Lankan situation. For example, when India voted against us at the UNHRC resolution, we did not get angry with India because we knew the Indian Government was under pressure from the extremist groups.

In the same manner, India will also understand our position. First of all, we must save the Government. We must preserve the Government. We can’t just throw out the power given to us by the people to govern the country. We have to be practical politicians and take practical decisions.

Q: If we go ahead with the amendments, how will it affect the relationship between the two countries?

A: India voted against us at the UNHRC and still our relationship with India has never diminished. We understand each other. This is a matter concerning the internal affairs of this country. For example, one of the amendments which we are bringing is on par with the Indian Constitution. That is if we legislate on any provincial subject that becomes law only if the particular province approves it. That is how it is worded in our Constitution. But in the Indian Constitution if the majority of the provinces approve it, it becomes the law for all the provinces. We are bringing that amendment to be on par with the Indian Constitution. So how can India go against that? We have a good relationship with India. There can be grey areas here and there. That does not mean that our relationship has broken.

Q: Will there be more changes in future or is this the final amendment to the 13th Amendment?

A: We don’t know. The intention of the Government is to revive the PSC. We have indicated to the political parties to appoint their representatives. Once the PSC makes its deliberations with regard to any other provisions of the Constitution or any other suggestions, certainly if we arrive at a consensus at the PSC which needs a Constitutional amendment, we have to bring those amendments accordingly.

We passed the Special Provisions Act for voting in the northern provincial election last week. The Government has thought it is prudent to bring certain amendments earlier and thereafter even those amendments can be reconsidered in the PSC. We will be discussing on a very broad perspective. They can bring issues; that is why I said they can bring plus, minus, repeal or add; anything could be done, provided consensus is reached there. That is why we are inviting the parties.

Q: What do you think about the Constitution proposed by the UNP?

A: We want the UNP to come to the PSC and place their proposal before us. We are happy to discuss these proposals and see whether there is anything substantial in those proposals to incorporate into the Constitution. We are with an open mind.

Q: The UNP, the party that introduced the executive presidency, is now saying it should be abolished. Your comments?

A: On one hand, we are happy that UNP is also trying. I don’t know how genuine this is. There have been several chances before. But at that time, they were not active and they were very adamant. I don’t know whether they are trying to do this just get political advantage. If they are genuinely interested and have changed their position, we are happy. But that too needs consensus. Some parties say the executive presidency must be retained. Anyway let the UNP come and explain the structure. Those issues have to be sorted out. You can’t just say yes or no.

Q: How prepared is the Government to face the Northern Provincial Council elections?

A: Any election is decided by the people. Whatever the verdict, we will accept it. We are a democratic party. There is no hard and fast rule that we have to win each and every election. The Government is a democratic Government. We want to establish provincial councils in the north. The President has given that undertaking. He will abide by that. We are not worried about the results. What is needed is the process.

Q: Why did the Northern Province elections get delayed?

A: It was delayed because no census was taken. The census was taken a few months ago. Meanwhile, the voters’ registry has to be certified. In Parliament we passed a law to facilitate the IDPs. We are doing all these to have a free and fair election. This is a credit to the Government.

Q: Is it true that the decision to have Northern Provincial election was to please the international community?

A: No. That is not true. We have not done anything to please the international community. The international community was expecting many things from us. Did we do anything just for the sake of pleasing them? No. We just take national interest into consideration. It is very essential for this election to be held in the national interest. We are not going to dance to the tune of the international community. Anything we feel is correct and has to be done, we do that. We have to be mindful. We will not be able to amend the Constitution without a two-thirds majority. Why we are having the PSC is to get broad consensus and support.