By Raj Sivanathan –

The trajectory of Sri Lanka’s National People’s Power (NPP) on the question of Provincial Council (PC) elections underscores how political priorities shift with the assumption of state power. Once, as the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), the party spearheaded the rejection of delimitation. Today, with a commanding two-thirds majority in Parliament, the NPP has recommitted to the very process it once condemned—announcing at the United Nations Human Rights Council (OHCHR) today that PC elections will only be held once a new delimitation exercise is complete.

2018: JVP’s Obstruction of Delimitation

In 2017, the UNP–SLFP coalition amended the law to introduce a mixed electoral system for PCs. A Delimitation Committee led by K. Thavalingam was tasked with redrawing electoral boundaries.

When its report was tabled in Parliament in August 2018, it met with overwhelming resistance. JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake declared it “flawed, biased and unworkable in ensuring fair representation” (Hansard, 24 August 2018). The JVP insisted that while the mixed system was acceptable in principle, the report itself was unacceptable.

Other JVP MPs argued the government had “bulldozed the 2017 amendment without proper consultation” (Hansard, August 2018). In effect, the JVP’s opposition contributed to the defeat of the report, leaving the PC system in limbo.

The ideological context mattered: the JVP had always opposed Provincial Councils as a product of the 1987 Indo–Lanka Accord, an institution they viewed as both unnecessary and wasteful.

NPP in Power: A Strategic Reversal

Since winning the presidency in September 2024 and securing a two-thirds parliamentary majority in November (Financial Times, 2024), the NPP has recalibrated its stance.

At a London address in February 2025, Anura Kumara admitted that “Provincial Councils will continue, but they are not the solution to our national question” (Daily Mirror, 2025). Sunil Handunnetti echoed that PCs are only an “interim measure until a lasting solution is found” (The Morning, 2025).

Today, in Geneva, the government formally told the OHCHR that no PC elections will take place until a new delimitation process is finalised (OHCHR country report, September 2025).

Delimitation: A Convenient Delay

The call to restart delimitation is not without controversy.

• Former Election Commissioner Mahinda Deshapriya publicly stated that a comprehensive delimitation process would take at least three years to complete. This means PCs could remain suspended until 2028, unless extraordinary fast-tracking is applied.

• Just two days ago, Tilvin Silva confirmed that the government only plans to appoint a new Delimitation Commission next year, coinciding with preparations for the next general or presidential elections. Critics note that if the NPP was genuinely committed, the process should have been included in their manifesto or initiated immediately after forming government. Almost a year has passed without progress, undermining the credibility of the new announcement.

What Motivates the NPP?

Several factors explain this calculated reversal:

1. Legal Compliance – The amended law requires delimitation before any PC elections. Restarting the process projects constitutional legitimacy.

2. Political Timing – A fresh delimitation process buys time, likely delaying elections for years and keeping PCs in suspension.

3. Electoral Engineering – Redrawing boundaries could reduce Tamil-majority dominance in the North and East, limiting the leverage of regional Tamil parties.

4. Alternative Governance Models – The NPP remains sceptical of PCs. Tilvin Silva has long advocated replacing them with a Panchayat-style system (Tilvin Silva, JVP press briefing, 2017). The revival of delimitation may thus be a precursor to structural change.

5. International Optics – Engaging in delimitation allows the government to claim progress to international observers while maintaining full control over timing and substance.

Continuity Behind the Shift

• 2018 JVP in Opposition: Opposed delimitation to block PC elections, citing bias and unfairness.

• 2025 NPP in Government: Revives delimitation to delay elections, reshape boundaries, and prepare for constitutional alternatives.

The party’s scepticism of PCs remains consistent; the approach is now strategic rather than obstructive.

Conclusion

The NPP’s decision to restart PC delimitation illustrates how opposition rhetoric transforms into government manoeuvres. While presented as a constitutional necessity and international obligation, the policy operates as a delaying strategy, buying time until national elections and potentially weakening Tamil autonomy.

It is also unfortunate that the JVP, in attempting to satisfy hardliners, is repeating a historical misstep. Originally, the party opposed Indian involvement and the 13th Amendment (13A), fighting against perceived external interference. Today, by rejecting or delaying devolution mechanisms, they risk undermining the utility of 13A—not just for the North and East, but for the country as a whole. In practice, the amendment’s provisions are more significant for the majority population in the South. Historically, Western Province alone has introduced more than 70 statutes under devolution powers, demonstrating the potential of empowered provincial councils.

Economic growth and development alone will not automatically increase devolution. Unless political will aligns with constitutional mechanisms, provinces will remain constrained, and the promise of locally-driven governance will remain unfulfilled. For the Tamil-majority North and East, this underscores the fragility of their limited autonomy, and for Sri Lanka as a whole, it highlights a missed opportunity to strengthen governance through meaningful provincial empowerment.