Questioning Power: The Case for Abolishing the Executive Presidency

In the realm of political analysis, the Executive Presidency serves as a vivid example validating Lord Acton's famous adage: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Within Sri Lankan society, enlightened voices echo a call for systemic change, propelled by a profound awareness of the daily struggles endured by the populace, wrought by social injustice and economic hardships.

Over decades, successive governments wielding the Executive Presidency have been indicted for their abuse, mismanagement, and corruption, culminating in a landscape marred by governance failures and economic turmoil. The lived experiences of citizens spanning four and a half decades affirm the direct culpability of this system in fostering poor governance and exacerbating today's economic crisis.

Notably, the fervent gathering of Aragalaya activists at Galle Face Green two years past, united in their thousands, rallied under a singular demand: the abolition of the Executive Presidency.

Yet, even in its nascent proposal stage, opposition to the Executive Presidency reverberated. Following the UNP's sweeping victory in 1977, the very notion sparked immediate criticism from the SLFP and leftist factions, including the JVP. Historical accounts reveal that during preparations for the 1972 Republican Constitution, UNP luminary J. R. Jayewardene proposed the Executive Presidency to then-SLFP leader Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike—an offer politely rebuffed. Opposition parties and constitutional scholars foresaw the perils of endowing unchecked authority upon the Executive, warning of a transparency and accountability crisis ripe for fostering mismanagement and corruption.

The North and East regions of the island offer a telling backdrop to the Executive Presidency's legacy. Analysts draw a pivotal link to the LTTE's rapid ascent from a fledgling entity in 1978 to a formidable militant force by July 1983, capable of brazenly ambushing an Army patrol in Tirunelveli, Jaffna, claiming the lives of 13 servicemen.

The Impact of the Executive Presidency on Tamil Community Alienation and National Reconciliation

Analysts attribute the swift rise of the LTTE, a once small terrorist group, to a surge in Tamil public support following the implementation of the 1978 Constitution, which introduced the Executive Presidency. The enactment of this constitutional change, analysts argue, closed the door on any possibility of Tamil representation in the executive branch of the government, igniting a wave of frustration within the Tamil community. This frustration found expression in the rallying cry around the LTTE, perceived as the staunch adversary of the "Sinhalese-dominated" establishment.

Critically, the exclusive nature of the Executive Presidency, where only candidates from the majority Sinhalese community could realistically vie for the highest political office, deepened the sense of alienation among Tamils. The absence of representation at the highest echelons of power further marginalized the Tamil community, exacerbating existing grievances.

The abolition of the Executive Presidency, therefore, holds the promise of addressing one of the core grievances of the Tamil community and advancing the cause of national reconciliation. This systemic change is viewed as a crucial step towards fostering inclusivity and healing the wounds of ethnic division.

Dr. N.M. Perera, a revered figure in Sri Lankan politics and a vocal critic of the Executive Presidency, foresaw the challenges inherent in its structure. His prediction in 1978 of the inevitable failure of "cohabitation" governments—comprising a President and Prime Minister from rival parties—has been borne out by subsequent events. The strained relationship between Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and Executive President Chandrika Kumaratunga in 2001 exemplifies this, culminating in the abrupt dismissal of the Prime Minister by the Executive President in 2004.

Despite these tensions, the legacy of this government endures in the passage of the 17th Amendment, a landmark reform curbing the powers of the Executive Presidency. This legislative achievement stands as a testament to the resilience of democratic institutions in the face of executive overreach.

The Dynamics of Cohabitation Governments: Challenges and Reforms

The intricate dance of cohabitation governments in Sri Lanka has been marked by tumultuous shifts and constitutional crises, underscored by the delicate balance of power between the Executive President and Prime Minister.

In December 2015, the nation witnessed the ascent of a new cohabitation government, with Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister and Maithripala Sirisena as Executive President. However, discord between the two leaders plunged the government into turmoil, culminating in a constitutional crisis when President Sirisena abruptly dismissed Prime Minister Wickremesinghe in favor of Mahinda Rajapaksa. This power struggle led to a brief 52-day tenure for Rajapaksa as Prime Minister, before Wickremesinghe's reinstatement following a Supreme Court ruling in December 2018. The uneasy cohabitation persisted until President Sirisena dissolved the government in November 2019. Notably, amidst this political turbulence, the government succeeded in passing the 19th Amendment, a pivotal step towards restoring checks and balances on Presidential powers.

Fast forward to July 22, 2022, another cohabitation government emerged, with Ranil Wickremesinghe assuming the role of Executive President and Dinesh Gunawardena as Prime Minister. Despite initial apprehensions, this government has navigated smoothly, earning praise for its effective management amidst economic challenges. President Wickremesinghe's leadership not only mitigated the impact of the economic crisis but also spearheaded initiatives for economic recovery, including an IMF-supported program.

Moreover, President Wickremesinghe wasted no time in enacting the 21st Amendment, aimed at reinforcing accountability and separation of powers, essential pillars of good governance. This legislative endeavor signifies a concerted effort to restore the integrity of democratic institutions.

In a curious twist of fate, Sri Lanka finds itself under the stewardship of an Executive President, once a proponent of abolishing the Executive Presidency, who now champions reforms to curtail its powers. This paradox underscores the complexity of Sri Lanka's political landscape and the evolving nature of governance dynamics.

Shifting Political Tides: Reconsidering the Executive Presidency

Interestingly, the UNP, under the stewardship of the current President, has long been aligned with the Executive Presidency, reaffirming its support for the system as recently as the 2010 conference held in Hambantota. However, against the backdrop of evolving political dynamics, public sentiment in Sri Lanka unmistakably leans towards the abolition of the Executive Presidency.

In conclusion, the discourse surrounding the Executive Presidency in Sri Lanka reflects a nuanced interplay of political history, public opinion, and evolving leadership dynamics. While the UNP's historical alignment with the Executive Presidency might seem entrenched, the prevailing sentiment among the populace signals a growing consensus for its abolition. As Sri Lanka navigates this pivotal juncture in its political landscape, the imperative lies in heeding the voices of the people and forging a path forward that fosters democratic governance and national unity.