IGP’s appointment and CC’s failings

After months of speculation and haggling, Deshabandu Tennakoon was appointed as the country’s new Inspector General of Police (IGP) by President Ranil Wickremesinghe.

The appointment was made after the Constitutional Council (CC) approved the proposal to confirm Tennakoon as IGP, three months after he was made acting IGP. A lot has been written on the merits and demerits of his appointment, but the process adopted by Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena, who is the Chairman of the CC, is not without controversy.

The Prime Minister, Speaker and Opposition Leader are ex-officio members of the CC while its other members include Minister Nimal Siripala De Silva, who is appointed by the President, MP Sagara Kariyawasam as the member representing the Government and MP Kabir Hashim as the nominee of the main opposition party in Parliament. The three others are civil society representatives, and they are Dr. Anula Wijesundera, Dr. Prathap Ramanujam and Dr. Dinesha Samararathne.

The 10th member of the CC is yet to be appointed hence as of now the Council functions with nine members and despite not being fully constituted, it has approved numerous appointments. There has been no decision as to who should be appointed as the 10th member as he or she has to be a member of any political party in Parliament, other than from the ruling party or the main opposition party.

At the meeting held to confirm Tennakoon to the post of IGP, four members, namely the Prime Minister, Minister de Silva, MP Kariyawasam and Dr. Wijesundera voted in favour while the Opposition Leader and his representative Kabir Hashim voted against the appointment. Dr. Ramanujam and Dr. Samararatne who were present at the meeting abstained.

The Speaker, likely after seeking the necessary legal advice, interpreted the two abstentions as opposed to the appointment and hence broke the tie by voting in favour of Tennakoon’s appointment. The CC decision was relayed to the President who in turn appointed Tennakoon as the country’s new IGP.

After the appointment was announced, Premadasa took to social media to say the Speaker had violated the Constitution by casting a vote saying he can do so only in case of a tie and that his interpretation that the two abstentions were in opposition to the appointment is wrong. Given that there are only nine members of the CC, the only possible tie at this point is if the votes are split 4/4 and hence the Speaker’s interpretation may have some merit.

There is no doubt that legal luminaries will put their minds to the arguments for and against how the decision was made and this could end up before the Supreme Court as well.

The whole idea of the CC was to depoliticise appointments but given the composition of the CC this is impossible. The failure of minor parties to come to a consensus on who should present them in the CC also shows that the whole process lacks credibility. The CC which came into effect after the 21st Amendment to the Constitution as passed was meant to make the process of confirming nominees to independent commissions and other high posts a more transparent and accountable one but a year on, the whole process looks a mess. The CC is also on a collision course with the Executive haggling over the confirmation of Justice Nissanka Bandula Karunaratne, who is the President of the Court of Appeal, to the Supreme Court and other judicial appointments.

What is clear is that it is impossible for the CC to function as an apolitical body given that the majority of its members are politicians belonging to different parties who are more interested in furthering political agendas than making the right appointments. A word has to be said of the two civil society representatives who abstained from voting on Tennakoon’s confirmation. If they don’t have the courage of their convictions to vote either way, they should resign and make room for others who are able to rise above politics and do their job.

As of now, the future of the CC doesn’t look very promising.