Abolishing Executive Presidency; is it the most pressing need?

Soon after Anura Kumara Dissanayake (AKD) had been sworn in as President, the NPP front-liner Sunil Handunneththi declared that voters had elected the last Executive President of Sri Lanka. The NPP manifesto gave an undertaking to pivot towards a parliamentary-based system of governance from the prevailing executive presidential framework. The newly elected Government also intends to appoint a ceremonial president without executive powers.

Many political administrations in the past had pledged to scrap the all-powerful post, but none of them delivered on their promises. The NGOs, Colombo-centric civil society activists, Liberal hurrah boys appear as the main protagonists who advocate for the abolition of the Executive Presidency. It is certainly not an issue which finds resonance among the masses or average citizens. Even in terms of priority, repealing the presidency cannot be considered as an issue of high importance. Nevertheless, there is a small section of opinion makers in the country whose narratives receive an overwhelming coverage from the media. These skewed ideologues believe that it is only them who have the ability to influence and shape the public discourse.

The groups that advocate for ending the presidency mainly hail from Leftist backgrounds and by and large their appreciation of the nation’s national security is doubtful. Whatever the critics might say the sense of stability and security provided by Late J.R. Jayewardene’s gift to the island is undisputable. The Executive Presidency enabled the State to repel the JVP-led insurgency in 1989 apart from defeating the LTTE. Therefore, eliminating a position which has enabled the country to safeguard its territorial integrity in addition to its security is fraught with danger. Removal of the Executive could undermine the national security apart from weakening the structure of the State.

Under the present system, the Executive President, who functions as Head of both Government and State, is directly elected by the people of the sovereign. However, under the system proposed by the NPP, Prime Minister would become Head of Government and he would not be elected directly from the voters. The Prime Minister can be removed from the post via a no-confidence motion and hence he needs to keep a majority of MPs satisfied to safeguard his position. Moreover, even a National List MP has the capacity to become Premier under this arrangement.

In contrast, the Executive is chosen directly by the people and is not dependent on the Legislature during the period of its existence for a specified number of years. As per Late President JR, such an executive is a strong executive, seated in power for a fixed number of years, not subject to the whims and fancies of an elected legislature. However, in order to reap the benefits of presidency, the majority of the legislature needs to support the executive. Even though the outgoing President Wickremesinghe’s UNP had only one seat in the Parliament, he received the support from the SLPP MPs who dominated the Legislature; therefore, he was able to go ahead with his economic reform agenda.

Some have erroneously attributed the Executive Presidency to the socio-economic problems of the country. The economic crisis originated because of the wrong economic policies implemented by successive Governments for a considerable period of time, with both voters and politicians showing fondness towards living beyond their means. The benefit of having a strong executive contributed in no small measure to execute unpopular yet critical economic reforms over the last two years to recover from the most unprecedented economic crisis in the history of the country.

The priority of the newly elected President should be to undertake the far-reaching changes in order to create the new social and economic order which citizens dream for. Embarking upon risky constitutional adventures would not serve the best interest of either the Government or people at large. Unprecedented benefits associated with the Executive can be diluted, but the office itself does not need to be removed.