20 June, 2024

Blog

Governors Must Be Detached From Politics 

By Jayampathy Wickramaratne

Dr Jayampathy Wickramaratne PC

There has been talk, for a few months, of new Governors being appointed to some Provinces. According to media reports, there is an agreement between the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna, the main party in Parliament, and the President’s United National Party that four nominees of the latter should be appointed as Governors. A spokesperson for the Presidential Secretariat has stated that four incumbent Governors have been requested to resign, adding that it is the tradition that Governors would resign when a new President is appointed. The names of prominent active members of the United National Party are mentioned as possible appointees.

Constitutional provisions 

The main constitutional provisions relating to the Governor are found in Article 154B. The Governor is appointed by the President and holds office, in accordance with Article 4(b), ‘during the pleasure of the President’. The Governor’s term of office is five years, and there is no bar to re-appointment. Article 156(1) of the Indian Constitution provides similarly: The Governor shall hold office during the pleasure of the President.

A former Chief Justice has opined that the only process by which a Governor could be removed is the one set out in Article 154B(4). According to that constitutional provision, a Provincial Council may present an address to the President advising the removal of the Governor on the ground that the Governor has intentionally violated the provisions of the Constitution, is guilty of misconduct or corruption involving the abuse of the powers of his office or is guilty of bribery of an offence involving moral turpitude. A resolution for such purpose must be signed by not less than one-half of the whole number of members and be passed by not less than two-thirds of the whole number of members, including those not present. A question that can be raised is whether such an address binds a President to remove a Governor.

The former Chief Justice has also questioned the propriety of a President who has succeeded to the office of President, removing a Governor who has been appointed by a President elected directly by the People.

Qualifications to be appointed as a Governor are not laid down in the Constitution, except that upon assumption of office, a Governor shall cease to hold any other office created or recognized by the Constitution and, if he is a Member of Parliament, shall vacate his seat in Parliament. A Governor shall not hold any other office or place of profit. In India, the only qualifications are that the person be a citizen and be not less than 35 years. 

In Sri Lanka, former judges, retired public servants and retired military officers have been appointed. On the other extreme, serving Ministers have given up their seats in Parliament to accept appointments as Governors. Successive governments have appointed active politicians. Many continued to be active even while holding the position. One Governor continued to be the chief organizer of the ruling party in an electorate coming within the same Province! There have been reports of politically active Governors using their positions for political ends.

One might argue that as the Governor holds office at the pleasure of the President, s/he could be removed by the President at any time. On the other hand, does the President have the power to dismiss a Governor without a valid reason? The Governor of the Western Province, former Chief Justice S. Sharvananda, was removed by President D.B. Wijetunge after he removed a Minister as advised by the Chief Minister in the Opposition-controlled Provincial Council, despite pressure brought on him by the Government.

Indian experience

In Rameshwar Prasad v Union of India (2006) 2 SCC 1, the Indian Supreme Court critically examined the role of the Governor and referred extensively to the 1988 Report of the Justice Sarkaria Commission on Centre-State Relations.

The Sarkaria Commission had stated that the key to restoring the prestige of the Governor’s office lay in picking the right person for the sensitive constitutional post. Apart from the constitutionally prescribed qualifications, the report listed a few more- that the person should be eminent in some walk of life, be from outside the State, be a detached figure having little connection with local politics and that he must not have taken too great a part in politics generally and particularly in the recent past. 

The Supreme Court observed as follows: ‘Unfortunately, the criteria have been observed in almost total breach by all political parties. It is seen that one day a person is in active politics in as much as he holds the office of the chief minister or minister or a party post and almost on the following day or, in any case, soon thereafter, the same person is appointed as Governor in another state with hardly any cooling off period. Ordinarily, it is difficult to expect detachment from party politics from such a person while performing the constitutional functions as governors.’ 

The Punchhi Commission on Centre-State Relations, headed by a former Chief Justice of India, recommended in its 2010 report that a nominee should not have participated in active politics even at the local level for at least a couple of years before his appointment. It also agreed with the Sarkaria Commission’s recommendation that a Governor should be an eminent person and not belong to the State where he is to be posted. 

B.P. Singhal v Union of India (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 296/2004, SC Minutes 07.05.2010) concerned the removal of the Governors of Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Haryana and Orissa by the new UPA Government in 2004. The Indian Supreme Court held that although the President can remove the Governor from office at any time without assigning any reason and without giving any opportunity to show cause, that power cannot be exercised in an arbitrary, capricious or unreasonable manner. The power should be exercised in rare and exceptional circumstances for valid and compelling reasons. A Governor cannot be removed on the ground that he is ‘out of sync’ with the policies and ideologies of the party in power at the Centre. Nor can he be removed on the ground that the Union Government has lost confidence in him. It follows, therefore, that change in the government at the Centre is not a ground for the removal of Governors holding office to make way for others favoured by the new government. 

As to who should be appointed as Governors, the Court stated: ‘Reputed elder statesmen, able administrators and eminent personalities, with maturity and experience are expected to be appointed as Governors. While some of them may come from a political background, once they are appointed as Governors, they owe their allegiance and loyalty to the Constitution and not to any political party and are required to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.’

Just last week, India witnessed the consequences of ‘political’ Governors using their positions to undermine the elected administrations in Opposition-controlled States. Bhagat Singh Koshyari, a BJP and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh veteran from Uttarakhand, had been appointed Governor of Maharashtra immediately after finishing his legislative career. His tenure was full of controversy, culminating in his resignation after his role in the dissolution of the anti-BJP coalition. Last Thursday, a five-member Bench of the Supreme Court, in Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary, Governor of Maharashtra (Writ Petition (C) No. 493 of 2022), rapped him for entering the ‘political arena’ and declared his action illegal. Another case decided on the same day, also by a five-member Bench, Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (Civil Appeal No. 2357 of 2017), resulted from a year-long and yet-ongoing tug-of-war between Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Lt. Governor Vinai Kumar Saxena. Saxena has held no political office but is a strong supporter of the BJP. He is from Uttar Pradesh but considers Gujarat, Premier Modi’s home state, to be his ’emotional home’. Saxena has not spared any opportunity to obstruct Kejriwal in favour of the Centre. The Court stressed the importance of ensuring that the governance of States is not taken over by the Central Government and confirmed Delhi’s control over administrative services in respect of subjects coming under the National Capital Territory. Both Benches were headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud.

Sri Lanka

In Sri Lanka, too, there have been many instances of Governors, former politicians as well as others, interfering with the democratic process as well as hindering the lawful activities of Provincial Councils. Reference may be made to two of the worst cases.

At the elections to the Provincial Councils of the North Western Province and the Southern Province held in 1993, no party obtained an absolute majority. Elected members of the People’s Alliance (PA) and Democratic United National Front (DUNF), who together constituted a majority, signed affidavits expressing support for G.M. Premachandra (DUNF) and Amarasiri Dondangoda (PA) to be appointed as Chief Ministers in the two respective Provinces. However, the respective Governors (Montague Jayawickreme and Bakeer Markar, both former politicians of the ruling United National Party) appointed Jayawickrama Perera and M.S. Amarasiri of the UNP as the respective Chief Ministers, upon the latter claiming, without any proof, that they had the support of some members of the other two parties. Upon the Supreme Court holding in Premachandra v. Major Montague Jayawickrema ([1994] 2 Sri LR 90) that the appointments were reviewable by courts and the Court of Appeal quashing the appointments in Premachandra and Dodangoda v. Jayawickrema and Bakeer Markar ([1993] 2 Sri LR 294), the two Governors had to eat humble pie and appoint Premachandra and Dodangoda. 

The dissolution of the UNP-controlled North-Central and Sabaragamuwa Provincial Councils by the respective Governors on the order and direction of President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga but against the advice of the respective Chief Ministers, who commanded the support of a majority of members of the relevant Provincial Council, was the subject matter in Maithripala Senanayake v Mahindasoma  ([1998] 2 Sri LR 333.). Affirming the judgment of the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court held that in exercising his power to dissolve a Provincial Council, the Governor was mandatorily required by the Constitution to act in accordance with the advice of the Chief Minister so long as the Board of Ministers commands, in the opinion of the Governor, the support of the majority. The Governor cannot exercise the power in his discretion, on the directions of the President. 

Active politicians should not be appointed

The Steering Committee of the Constitutional Assembly of the previous Parliament, chaired by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, was of the view that constitutional provisions should be made to prohibit the Governor from engaging in party politics while holding office.

Although our Constitution allows even a sitting Member of Parliament to be appointed as a Governor, it is best that active politicians are not appointed. As the Indian Supreme Court and the Sarkaria and Punchhi Commissions have pointed out, there must be a ‘cooling off’ period of at least two years before a former politician is appointed. To ensure that a Governor, whether a former politician or otherwise, would act in accordance with the Constitution and the law and not in a manner that undermines the Provincial Council for political reasons, it is best that constitutional provision is made for the Constitutional Council to approve the nomination made by the President after obtaining the views of the Chief Minister. 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 1
    3

    Jayampathy says,” Governors Must Be Detached From Politics”
    I do not agree with this statement. Governors should on the otherhand.be detached from party politics and not politics.
    The difference between the two is significant as on occasions Governors has to take a political decision such as if, when no party after election to that particular province had the support of the majority members , the Governor has the duty to form an opinion as to which politician among the members of that particular provincial council has the majority support to form a stable government in that particular province and the governor has no option in such an instant to appoint that person as the Chief minister.

    Governor has to exercise his discretionary powers in such instances.

  • 5
    0

    Governors Must Be Detached From Politics. Reasonable.
    For that to happen, Presidents Must Be Detached From Politics.

    • 1
      0

      It is fashionable nowadays to speak of System change.
      Does anyone know what constitutes a system change?
      An overhaul of the country is governed would constitute a System change.
      If the President leans politically, there need not be a Prime Minister with party affiliations.
      Because it would be either redundant or it would be confrontational.
      (Remember the Sirisena period.)
      Choosing whether we want to have only a President or both, would fall under system change.
      If we decide on both, ruling that the President should be apolitical should be made mandatory. That would be a huge system change.
      (If the President does not belong to a political party, his appointees for Governors would be apolitical too.)

      • 0
        0

        – An overhaul of the country is governed would constitute a System change.
        (Sorry: two words got left.)
        If included, it would read:
        An overhaul of the way the country is governed would constitute a System change.

      • 2
        0

        “It is fashionable nowadays to speak of System change.”
        May be so, but ‘systemic change’ seems unfashionable

  • 3
    0

    If Provincial Government is legal, then the Governor should be appointed on the recommendation of the provincial Council Chief Minister. Like the Parliament, even Situations like when the Elections cannot be done for Provincial Council, the ministerial powers of the government that was in power should be allowed to do the functions as the elected government of th province.
    Unfortunately, political alliance of the governors, Presidents brought more conflict in this country rather tahn solving the problems. It is sad that RW still keeping the two racist military generals who are creating more ethnic conflict as Ministers in parliament as Ministers.

    • 7
      1

      According to law, Governors should be appointed in consultation with chief minister. In the case of North and East it was never so. Governors should be ambassadors of peace between Government and Provincial Councils, but in the case of North and east racist supremacists have been appointed to carry on the agenda of Sinhalese to keep Tamils suppressed. Last two governors of north were Tamils, but they were just puppets of government warming the chair.
      Very soon there will be Indian military intervention to implement 13th amendment in full as per Indo-Lanka accord, and Sinhala racists who are dancing arrogantly will be put in their places.

      • 5
        0

        You are correct, the current eastern province governor, who was appointed by the former Gothabaya government has been accused by the majority of Tamil and Tamil speakers in the east of openly supporting the racist Sinhalese Buddhist agenda and Sinhalese settlement in the east and constantly acting against the interested of the native indigenous Tamils and they want her removed. They allege that she has never acted impartially or in a neutral manner. but always with a pro-Sinhalese Buddhist bias. This is a Tamil/Tamil-speaking majority province.

    • 0
      5

      You have a sound moral point there. But practicality?
      But look at India. Is any state governor of the Indian Union chosen by the state assembly?

      • 1
        1

        “Is any state governor of the Indian Union chosen by the state assembly? “

        Could you explain that please. Wake up dear friend from Deva Badus induces hallucination. You are not in India, You are in the heavenly Kingdom, Putin’s land. Who said or agreed with you that the Indian constitution is what Tamils are asking for? Why do you keep dreaming and frequently keep waking up and howling?

        Is that why Chinese communism is the greatest constitution for the people? Where did you get the moral authority to talk in this thread? When did you reply to the question of what did you do when Vasanthi ordered UOJ teachers and students to vote for rowdy-Rapist Royals on the University letterhead. The UNP & SLFP Murderers and rapists appointed by Sinhala Buddhist Stalins and Mussolinis are, Aanduwa as rulers over the Tamils Provinces as solution to Tamils call for freedom.

        • 1
          0

          There is nothing to explain.
          The state assembly has no say in the matter.
          *
          Still no control over the illegal stuff!

    • 0
      0

      Ajith,
      “Like the Parliament, even Situations like when the Elections cannot be done for Provincial Council, the ministerial powers of the government that was in power should be allowed to do the functions as the elected government of the province.”
      Agree, as in a caretaker mode, like the Parliament and GE period!
      That requires and amendment, which EP has no control at present!! The elections have been postponed for PC’s, because of the need to amend the constitution, provided SLPP is agreeable!!!

  • 6
    2

    Dear Dr Jayampathy Wickramaratne ,
    .
    I agree absolutely with your reasoning. A few additional thoughts though from me. I have little expertise or knowledge, but here goes.
    .
    Most of us, Sinhalese, don’t see much purpose served by the Provincial Councils; they seem to just multiply bureaucracy. However, Provincial Councils for the North and the East are cherished by those who live in those areas, and they are necessary because of the efforts made by Sinhalese who think that they “own” the entire country to change the demography of those areas.
    .
    The fact is that many Lankans hold strong views on these issues, and if they say something they try to make it anonymous.
    .
    In a sense what’s the use of debating all this when we have an illegitimate President;————————— he could help by adopting a lower profile until we vote for a new President in October 2024. Long before that, right now, he must allow Local Government Elections.
    .
    Panini Edirisinhe (NIC 483111444V) of Bandarawela

    • 4
      2

      This statement by Anura Kumara Dissanayake is still live.
      .
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQhlJY9aZ8s
      .

      Some of the thoughts and phrasings sound familiar, but much of it is important.
      .
      AKD himself acknowledges that there should be more in Tamil. Acceptance of other religions, not mere tolerance, is emphasised.
      .
      Much matter for further discussion. I’m typing whilst listening to this live. I shall come back to this.

      • 3
        3

        This joker seems to be day-dreaming of AKD but the tide of JVPrs came in is now gone out of media.
        When would this or the like senior citizens ever grasp the truths and facts before being able to go for voting again ? Am I the only person who feel that this man is always barking for the wrong tree ?
        May SM or the like stupid men be blessed with some brains so that our motherland can be free of all various kind of culprits and criminals. May “champa” or the like chaunists be free from their germs out of their heads. Senile bunches should go out of this country, leaving new energies to govern the nation. Alone to hear that MAHINDA the dog of the nation will be giving his oaths to be the PRMIER again stimulate us vomitting feelings.
        As some experts now believe, if they really want to make a change, they should enter the prevailing system regardless of it being highly corrupted or not because like or not people are with the corrupted bunchs.

    • 6
      1

      S-M,
      “In a sense what’s the use of debating all this when we have an illegitimate President;————————— he could help by adopting a lower profile until we vote for a new President in October 2024. Long before that, right now, he must allow Local Government Elections. ”

      I agree with you that it is absolutely right the current President and the parliament are illegitimate and they are pretending that they are going to solve all the problems now. Why cannot RW go in front of people now and what proposals and programmes you will have to solve the problems such as new constitution in which what is the role of relegions, what is the role of Central Government, devolution of power to solve the North East Problems, How you are going to improve or solve economic crisis and how to reduce the gap between poor and rich etc. and How we failed in the past 75 years and how the previous administration lead to bangruptcy etc. The country need a leader who is not afraid to challenge the wrongs.

      • 4
        3

        Illegitimate President?
        Can someone explain how a lawfully elected president can be illegitimate?
        If it was a coup that made one a president, there is case to use the qualifier ‘illegitimate’.

        • 1
          0

          SJ,
          Incumbent President is ILLEGITMATE, then all his ACTIONS FLOWING FROM THAT APPOINTMENT TOO ARE ILLEGITIMATE!!! Including LG elections and proclamations thereof or whoever is elected as a consequence thereof!!??
          What is the screwed up thinking of Charlatans and clowns making a cock-a-hoop of this situation!

          • 3
            0

            M
            Please look up any legal dictionary for what illegitimate means.
            You may disapprove of RW, and I too do.
            But I will be cautious about declaring his election illegitimate as it is inaccurate to say so.
            Let us not confuse legality with morality.

            • 0
              0

              SJ,
              Mea Culpa
              The intent was to question the ‘supposition’ RW as EP was illegitimate and not the converse!! Therefore, should reflect question raised or query, as to the assertion by parties, his position as EP was questionable!!! My folly was overlooking the NON-INCLUSION of word, “IF” before the word, “Incumbent” in my comment.
              I wish to tender my sincere apologies to all concerned for this oversight, which please accept!!
              My position too was challenging the ‘supposition’ by many that RW as EP was illegitimate!!!
              I am of the view that RW being or becoming EP succeeding GR is ‘LEGITIMATE’ and in accordance with the spirit and aspirations as laid out in the Primary Law – Constitution of SL and NOT the contrary position as reflected due to the word ‘IF’ being NOT IN PLACE!!?

        • 1
          0

          There is also a definition for illegitimate as “fair”. Yes, we have discussed several time in this forum that it is constitutionally or lawfully right but it is not based on the votes of the people. There is a difference between the elected President and Selected President. Yes it was a political coup as well. It also involved bribe and cheating.

          • 3
            0

            A
            RW was lawfully elected by the constitutionally designated electorate.
            Do you contest that?
            I said no more, no less on the subject

          • 0
            0

            (Part I)
            Ajith,
            “That it is constitutionally or lawfully right but it is not based on the votes of the people. There is a difference between the Elected President and Selected President.”
            RW has been ELECTED by the Representatives of the Sovereign People of SL, who are MP’s, duly DLEGATED TO PERFOM THAT DUTY, due to EXIGENCY of the circumstances – Sudden vacation of office of EP due ill health, other tragic circumstances before the termination of full elected TERM, by an electoral college of Parliamentarians!! It is for a ‘REDUCED PERIOD’ and NOT FULL TERM – 5 YEARS for temporary position to discharge duties of the Head of State (HoS), Head of Government (HoG) and importantly Commander in Chief (CiC) – interim period at a lesser expense than a full blown Presidential Election with Nomination of Candidates and Campaigning for 4 to 6 weeks, because there would be a “POWER VACCUM” IN THE EXECUTIVE ARM, which is UNDESIRABLE!!!
            All Presidents/HoS, world over are not elected directly by people/voters, but by Electoral College!!??
            THE PRESIDENT (1972) OF THE 1ST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA – ELECTORAL COLLEGE OF THE NATIONAL STATE ASSEMBLY (NSA)
            (TBC)

          • 0
            0

            (Part II)
            Which institution reverted back to become PARLIAMENT OF SRI LANKA in the constitution of the 2nd Republic in 1978!!! William Gopallawa became president by that process so was the GG’s from Independence since 1948!!!??
            GR, MaRa, CBK, RP were all SELECTED by the NOMINATING POLITICAL PARTY – SLPP, PA and UNP respectively as candidates to contest (UNLIKE PRIMARIES HELD IN US ELECTION OF PRESIDENT) and endorsed by the voters at an election!!!

      • 6
        2

        “The country need a leader who is not afraid to challenge the wrongs.”
        I am sure that there are plenty that will fit the bill, but there is a catch: not afraid to challenge only the wrongs of others”.

      • 2
        1

        Ajith,
        Myopia, Bigotry, Narrow mindedness at best!!!
        If INCUMBENT PRESIDENT be ILLEGITIMATE, than ALL HIS ACTIONS SHOULD BE DEEMED ILLEGITIMATE!!?
        All Presidential ACTS ILLEGITIMATE!!!???
        Then ability to remove or sack a Governor is illegitimate and appointment of another in place is illegitimate too!!!???
        Even if the incumbent President calls for LG elections and/or Facilitates it (which is what the clowns are calling upon him) to accede, IT IS ILLEGITIMATE TOO!!!??
        As per the ADAGE “One cannot have the CAKE and at the same time EAT it”!!!???
        PERHAPS, CHARLOTANS WOULD CLAIM, THAT just prior to it being EXPUNGED through ‘ORIFICE’ ANTERIOR ‘PERFUMED’ EXIT, IT’S WITHIN ONE’S BODY!?
        THEREFORE YOU HAVE IT IN YOUR POSESSION!? IRRATIONAL!!!
        Constitutionally, ONE MUST UNDERSATND, there has been “A PAUSE” in System of Government – Sri Lanka with the abdication or vacation of Post without forewarning by President Gota, as he found that he could not continue to Govern!!! Similarly, did Premadasa (Sr.) in 1993 and ‘Deaf+Blind’ 2+2 = 22 ascended Power, 3rd President, as per PROCESS LAID DOWN IN CONSTITUTION, elected by majority (elected and appointed) MPS, considered TRUE REPRESENTATIVES OF SOVEREIGN PEOPLE of SL!!?
        SAVVY POLITICIAN, Sirimavo (Housekeeper, turned POLITICIAN overnight) ACCLAIMED/ENDORSED WITH APPLOMB!!! HATS OFF!!!

        • 4
          0

          “(Housekeeper, turned POLITICIAN overnight)”
          After the SLFP lost in March 1960, they pleaded with her to lead the party at the polls.
          She did not contest a seat. But was appointed Senator.
          Did a better job than many males as PM.
          Perhaps good housekeeping makes one a good manager of things!

          • 0
            0

            Absolutely SPOT-ON!!
            FULLY AGREE – SHE MADE-UP FOR 2 MALE PM’s!! ONLY EXCEPTION WAS SIR JK!!??

      • 0
        0

        (Part I)
        Ajith,
        “I agree with you that it is absolutely right the current President and the parliament are illegitimate and they are pretending that they are going to solve all the problems now. Why cannot RW go in front of people now and what proposals and programmes you will have to solve the problems such as new constitution in which what is the role of religions, what is the role of Central Government, devolution of power to solve the North East Problems, How you are going to improve or solve economic crisis and how to reduce the gap between poor and rich etc. and How we failed in the past 75 years and how the previous administration lead to bankruptcy etc. The country needs a leader who is not afraid to challenge the wrongs.”
        Fully agree with you on the above, with some exception!!
        1. Constitutionally, he cannot hold election until full term of GR’s Presidency is exhausted!!!
        2. There are signs the economy is ‘TURNING AROUND’. SL RS APPRECIATED TO 300 = 1 USD! THAT IS AN APPRECIATION OF 20% FROM 375 = 1 USD LAST YEAR (MARCH 2022)
        3. The inflation would tend to come down
        (TBC)

      • 0
        0

        (Part II)
        4. Parliamentary majority is needed for solving NE, Religious problems
        5. He is taking action constructively to constrain the unbridled interference of SAFFRONS in the matter of Archaeology in NE temples and religious sites
        6. Acquired lands (NE) has been returned in the main to private owners!?
        What has been done incorrectly and unconstitutionally for the past 75 years cannot be undone, like “FLICKING AN ELECTRIC SWITCH”

  • 3
    3

    President RW announced sometime ago that he was looking at implementing the 13th Amendment in full with Land and limited Police Powers.
    The Eastern Province Governor Yahampath immediately expressed her opinion to the Media that these powers should not be devolved.
    Well she was challenging the Executive President; .

    A few Governors apparently were asked by the Presidential Secretariat to tender their resignations to make way for others to be appointed in their places.
    QUICKLY on the heels of this request, Buddhist monks, Moulavis and a Hindu Priest appear before the media and request the govt;to continue to keep the Eastern Province Governor.One does not be a rocket scientist to find out who was behind the scenes.

    Well, if President RW is unable to have his choice of Governors, at the least, how is he going to fix the Economy?

  • 1
    0

    Many articulate their views on the current socio-political situation in Sri Lanka in this forum. To ridicule such persons with derogatory remarks is in very bad taste and reflects poorly on the upbring and background of those making such vile comments. People across the country are looking for an alternative form of governance. In this backdrop the NPP is making massive inroads in the entire country, and will undoubtedly be a force to reckon with.

  • 1
    0

    When the Police and the Judiciary are not detached from politics, how can we expect the Governors to be detached? Even now the rumor is that Thondaman is to be appointed as the Governor of the Eastern Province. Is it the Governors or is it the President who has to be blamed for appointing politicians or politically connected persons as Governors? President should know to walk his own talk first!

  • 0
    0

    On a different subject: Still a serious question.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBNw_NoBzP4

    What was the price in Sri Lanka?
    How was the split?

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 5 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.