21 September, 2020

Blog

The Flash Election: A Political Way Out Or An Instance Of One Mistake Leading To Another?

By W A Wijewardena –

Dr. W.A Wijewardena

Adverse economic consequences of executive action

In a flash move, Parliament was dissolved last Friday by President Maithripala Sirisena, claiming he had powers to do so under the Constitution. It was not a sudden executive action, but the culmination of a series of actions he had been taking during the previous 14-day period. It all started when he sacked the incumbent Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and appointed the former President Mahinda Rajapaksa in his place on 26 October 2018.

Since Wickremesinghe refused to step down and continued to claim his right to premiership, there were two Prime Ministers, one sacked and the other just sworn-in. As I pointed in a previous article, it had led to a man-made constitutional crisis needing a quick fix to save the economy from a possible collapse.

Instead, the President prorogued Parliament till 16 November, claiming again that the new Government under Rajapaksa needed more time to prepare a Budget. The opposition cried foul play, but he continued to appoint Ministers for various portfolios in several rounds, giving priority to those who had crossed over from the ruling United National Party.

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Finance, on the direction of Rajapaksa who got the finance portfolio, had announced a relief package, nicknamed ‘midnight goodies’, causing a derailment of the Government Budget from the path it had taken toward better budgetary management in the recent past. The adverse consequences of this move on the economy, taxpayers and the exchange rate were analysed by me in a previous article.

When the pressure was built by the international community for reconvening Parliament to enable it to choose the Prime Minister, the date of reconvening the Parliament was advanced by two days to 14 November. The dissolution orders were issued when Parliament was to be reconvened on this date.

Debate over the constitutionality of the President’s action

The constitutional crisis has spawned a live debate about the constitutionality of President’s action among many citizens. Those debaters are composed of a cross-section of the community, such as politicians, lawyers, academics, civil right activists, and religious leaders.

Those who support the President argue that he has discretionary powers in the Constitution to hire and fire a PM, prorogue or reconvene Parliament, or dissolve Parliament. For them, what he has done is totally in accordance with the Constitution.

Those who oppose him, drawing on the literal meaning of different sections in the Constitution, present a case where he does not have such powers in the Constitution at all. Both sides have generously been supported by lawyers, who have accordingly begun to enjoy a field day in educating the public of the issue at hand.

Sri Lanka is a republic and not a monarchy

However, it appears that those who are in the debating mode have forgotten that Sri Lanka is a republic – a democratic socialist republic for that matter – and not a monarchy. The discretionary powers claimed by those who are supporting the President are in fact enjoyed only by a monarch. Even then, according to ancient Indian tradition, as postulated in The Laws of Manu, a guide book for kings to follow written around 3rd century BCE, a king should use his discretionary powers for the benefit of all those in his kingdom who look up to him for protection, survival and prosperity.

Says Manu in Chapter 7 of the Laws: the king has power to punish people but he should not use it discretionarily but in accordance with accepted laws and principles. One question which he should ask himself when meting out punishments is whether his use of powers would make everyone happy in the kingdom. If the Rod of Punishment is used properly with due consideration, it makes all subjects happy, while improper use will destroy everything. Therefore, even in the case of monarchs who are supposed to have discretionary powers, those powers should be used only with one objective in mind. That is, whether the exercise of those powers will lead to greater happiness among the subjects. If they do not, the king is advised by Manu not to use those discretionary powers.

Heads of republics should have prior training

The case of a republic – derived from Latin to mean ‘an entity of people’ – is completely different. Today, the head of a republic is designated President, meaning one who presides over an entity of people.

Hence, he has no powers which are not being enjoyed by the people who belong to the entity that he presides over. Plato, the Greek philosopher who lived in the 5th to 4th centuries BCE, presented the case of a city state which he called the republic in the book carrying the same title.

The contents in the book are presented in the form of a dialogue between Plato and his Guru, Socrates. Plato does not call the head of the republic the President, but the Guardian. For a republic to function properly, he insists that the Guardian should be a philosopher who has been trained in that art thoroughly before he assumes that position.

A philosopher here is not in the modern sense of a philosopher, but one who knows the right and the wrong, and could avoid the wrong if it is to the detriment of the people in the entity. When Socrates probed into that conception by questioning Plato whether it would be possible to train a greedy human in the art of philosophy, Plato gives the example of a dog who would always do things to please his master. If a dog can be trained in that art, so could a human being too. It is difficult but not impossible, according to Plato.

Presidential action should be through consultation

When we examine the behaviour of the Guardians of republics today throughout the world, we observe that in a majority of cases, they do not show the signs of being pre-trained in that art altogether. Those who elect them to guardianship never ask the question whether they had undergone a similar training and acquired the needed discipline. As such, they are just elevated to that high position, even though they do not possess a proper understanding of what a republic is, or what role they should perform in their new position as guardians.

If they have been trained, they would always use those so called discretionary powers in consultation with the main stakeholders. This applies to the whole range of work they do as guardians, such as the appointment or the dismissal of a Prime Minister, prorogue, convene or dissolve Parliaments, and fixing dates for conducting elections.

Even though Great Britain is not a republic but a monarchy, the monarch has always followed these rules to the letter. A similar practice is found in other dominions like Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. Even in Sri Lanka, before the promulgation of the 1978 Republican Constitution, the Governor General or the President, as the case may be, had the habit of consulting the Prime Minister whenever he had to perform these duties by the people. In the case of the present Constitution, this requirement has not been written into law, but the fact that it is a republic and not a monarchy has made it clear that such a consultative process is necessary before the President uses his discretionary powers. Since Sri Lanka’s present President had not followed this process in his executive actions in the last two weeks, his action has not been in accordance with the Constitution.

Huge economic costs of Presidential actions

The economic costs of what the President had done in the last 14-day period have been enormous. Two international credit rating agencies, Moody’s and Fitch Rating, had flagged Sri Lanka over the uncertainty created by the constitutional crisis created by the President.

The corollary would be for Sri Lanka to pay a higher interest rate when it goes to the market to borrow in foreign exchange in order to repay its maturing debt. As a clue to this, the prices of all sovereign bonds which Sri Lanka had issued in the past had fallen across the border, the deepest being the bonds due to mature in a few months’ time. As a result, the present market interest rates on these bonds have increased by about 2% to 5% in the last two-week period.

As I have argued in my previous article under reference, the constitutional crisis has brought in uncertainty and the markets do not like it. When they react to this uncertainty, they punish the market participants ferociously. This is already evident in the case of the operations of the share market and the Government securities market. In the case of the share market, the foreigners had sold on a net basis shares amounting to about Rs 8 billion or $ 45 million. In the Government securities market, the total sales have been about Rs 21 billion or $ 120 million. Altogether, foreigners who do not like uncertainty have taken out of Sri Lanka about $ 165 million and it has put pressure for the rupee to depreciate in the market. This is indeed a dreadful experience for those in power, as well as those who are being ruled by them.

Impact on the Budget

The flash dissolution of Parliament has created another vital issue for the country’s budgetary operations. The Budget for 2019 was to be presented to Parliament on 5 November. However, due to the prorogation of Parliament a week before that date, the presentation of the Budget was made a non-event. It was then reported that the Government was contemplating to present a Vote on Account to Parliament when it was to be reconvened on 14 November.

A vote on account

A Vote on Account is not a budget but permission given by Parliament to the Ministry of Finance to continue for the first three months of 2019 with the same expenditure, revenue, and borrowings, as approved by Parliament when it passed the Budget for 2018. The weakness in Votes on Account is that they do not contain new budgetary policies, and therefore are not aligned to the on-going reform program relating to Sri Lanka’s budgetary policy. To cover the balance 9 months after the lapse of the Vote on Account, a proper budget was to be presented by the new Government to Parliament. Though it is a better option than not having a budget at all, that mini-budget would not be able to present a comprehensive set of new budgetary policies. As such, as far as the budgetary reforms are concerned, the year 2019 will be a complete write-off.

Rescue clauses authorising President to spend money

When the Parliament was dissolved before it could meet on 14 November, this option too became a non-event. Now, Sri Lanka does not have a budget for 2019 and as a result, the Ministry of Finance would not be able to raise revenue for carrying out the public services in the country. However, sections 150 (3) and (4) of the Constitution provides for the President to authorise the payments for public services and the costs of the general election out of the Consolidated Fund of the Government for three months. These sections are rescue sections in the absence of a proper budget or a Vote on Account approved by Parliament, which has the authority concerning the public finances of the country. However, when implementing this, the Ministry of Finance will meet a new set of difficulties.

Consolidated Fund is a cash-flow account

The Consolidated Fund is simply a copy of the cash book of the General Treasury. It starts with an opening balance at the beginning of the year. All tax and non-tax revenues, interest incomes and proceeds of loans are added to that opening balance. Then, from the total fund availability, expenditure of the Government on account of both recurrent and capital items, payment of interest and repayment of loans are deducted. The closing balance is then taken forward for the next year.

Consolidated Fund in Sri Lanka doesn’t have money

Because of the deficit financing which Sri Lanka has been incurring throughout its post-independence history, the opening and closing balances of the Consolidated Fund are always overdrawn. It is similar to the overdraft balance in the bank account of a private entity. According to the Annual Report of the Ministry of Finance for 2017, at the beginning of the year, the Consolidated Fund had been overdrawn to the extent of Rs 187 billion. With a very bad budgetary operation during the year in which out-payments were much bigger than the inflows, the year had ended with an overdrawn balance of Rs 286 billion. The latest number available for 2018 has been that pertains to the end of April 2018. As at that date, the Consolidated Fund had been overdrawn to the extent of Rs 145 billion.

How to fill the gap in the Consolidated Fund

What it means is that in terms of the Constitution, the President can authorise payments out of the Consolidated Fund. But without new revenue sources, it would always be in deficit and to finance the deficit, the Ministry of Finance will not be able to borrow money, since that borrowing program has not been approved by Parliament. Hence, due to the flash dissolution of Parliament before a proper budget or a Vote on Account is approved, Sri Lanka will run into a serious budgetary crisis.

Not too late to unravel the entanglement

It appears that the President has moved from one mistake to another through his executive action done without proper consultation in the last two-week period. This has entwined the whole country and the economy in an entangled web of mistakes. It is still not too late for him to unravel this entanglement.

*W A Wijewardena, a former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, could be reached at waw1949@gmail.com

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 8
    0

    This power hungry idiot is going to destroy.. Sri Lankan economy, its reputation and good will..
    Now tourism will go down.
    rupees will go down..
    business will go down..
    investment will go down..
    I hope and pray Maithri too go down soon.
    He will be punished by MR soon..
    Maithri has no power now.
    MR family got it all.

    • 1
      1

      Blues and green’
      “Now tourism will go down.
      rupees will go down..
      business will go down..
      investment will go down..”
      Except for tourism, other things happened when Ranil and his ‘Royal Samanala Kalliya’ managed the economy. Western countries who have got shaken by the dismissal of Ranil are trying to exaggerate the situation and paint a gloomy picture. If President allowed Ranil’s Government to continue, possibly the situation could have got worse.

    • 1
      0

      Dear “Blues and green”,
      .
      This man, Sirisena, has turned into an idiot and a lunatic who doesn’t seem to know whether he’s coming or going. He is not exactly “power-hungry”. With limited understanding of what’s going on, he imagines that he alone has a coherent mind.
      .
      Quite the contrary: he has no mind at all. It is amazing that there still is law and order in the country. I’m waiting to see for myself. I hadn’t left Sri Lanka for 24 years, but a fortnight ago I got to Malaysia, for a holiday paid for by my daughter, who has been here for four years. Next year she starts educating her children in Sri Lanka – considered madness by most people.
      .
      By 4.00 p.m. today, I’ll be back in what will always be our country. All this is certain; I hope that the rest of my prognosis is not.
      .
      If violence does break out on the streets, there’ll be no containing it. Dr Wijewardene is quite right in saying that all forms of governance have broken down. Only two comments to date. I fear that the unravelment that Douglas looks for won’t be one that is to our liking.
      .
      So far only Prof. Jeevan Hoole has refused to obey illegal orders. I predicted that of him two days ago – please see my comment on that article. That refusal was fine, but what if the police refuse to maintain law and order?

  • 6
    0

    Dr. Wijewardane: We understand the complicated “Deliberate: and “Man Made” situation. In the end you say: “It is not too late for him to unravel this entanglement”. What is your “ADVICE” or the “PROPOSAL” to him – (the President) to “Unravel this Entanglement”? Thank you.

    • 1
      0

      D.
      Nothing new.
      It’s always been an enigma but the country survives by hook or by crook although “the people” were always aware the candidates chosen by popular vote were not really honorable; basically crooks.

    • 0
      0

      Dpuglas,

      That part Dr. Wijewardane will put it in Sinhala on some other media, CT allows only English at the moment

    • 0
      0

      I think he can allow SC to declare his action unconstitutional and go back to pre October 26 position to restart anew.

  • 1
    0

    Sri lanka is not a country that Should address th needs of the So called International community, since 1948, which implement their agenda in the region. Everybody knows vaiours NGOs including those of environmental groups, TRanparency, Human rights, Religious and manyother groups are addressing the needs of the Western Allience of the sa called International Commuinity. Even though you do not acknowledge, Many educated in Sri lanka accept, That Executive PResidency was important in winning the war. 18th and 19th amendment should be nullified via 20th. Instead A true Executive president should be elected by peoples vote. Parliament should be able to qauestion the president inthe parliament but they should not be able to impeach the president. Supreme courts should be able to show that the president is wrong. Yey, Only a referendum should be allowed to decide that the presidentwas wrong. What ever it is, IF the president uses his powers to engage in crimes or financial frauds of any sort he should be able to be prosecuted inthe courts. See HOW BANGLADESH WHICH WAS BORN IN 1972 IS MORE DECENT – RECENTLY THEY PROSECUTED A PM OR A PRESIDENT WHO PLUNDERED THE COUNTRY. Bangladesh is more developed than Sri lanka which became independant in 1948. For those who are educated and hold very important positions in Srilanks what should do is do something helpful to sri lanka and not writing crap articles. See what PAL HORU #1 and PAL HORU #2 and PAL HORU #3 are preparing. They are preparing for the next plundering. Bribing and buying out is happening inthe open. Who informs those to the people. None.

  • 0
    0

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.For more detail see our Comment policy https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/comments-policy-2

  • 1
    1

    What president did was very correct. In a very difficult place, Parliament full of thieves and back stabbers, he had to be patient. Now he has to be careful about Mahinda Rajapakse and Ranil both of whom can doublecross any time and the civil society aka Open society which fulfills the International community agenda. Those who support the stability of Sri lanka should come to the front and support the president.

  • 0
    0

    Who knows, perhaps MS is controlled at geopolitical levels. Who knows if any of two regional powers wants an early elections in SL? Even if we trust China, we cannot trust India that plays double game between China and US. Perhaps a coalition government with a Prez and PM opposing each other’s views might be a real head-ache for India that has been abnormally silent during these days. Who knows if India wanted a stronger PM or Prez? Before all these, MR, MS and RW closely interacted with India, not China.
    .

  • 0
    0

    Can you unscramble a 14-day old omelette?

  • 0
    0

    There is only one way out. The need of the hour is a CROMWELL as was under Charles 1 of England.

  • 0
    1

    Dr W A Wijewardena ~ “……….One Mistake Leading To Another?”.
    We have been doing this all the time.
    But this time the dissolution of Parliament was to avert blood-spill in the Parliament Well. The spillover into streets cannot be controlled.
    The last action by MS was bold. We must leave the technicalities out for the time being.
    .
    Please appeal for calm Dr DA W. Because you are a respected community leader it will go a long way.

  • 0
    0

    What a clear, well informed and sober piece of writing Dr W has provided us with. One part of his offering which I found very instructive were the comments on the qualities required of a president to properly discharge the duties of that office.

    Dr W observes, “When we examine the behaviour of the Guardians of republics today throughout the world, we observe that in a majority of cases, they do not show the signs of being pre-trained in that art altogether. Those who elect them to guardianship never ask the question whether they had undergone a similar training and acquired the needed discipline. As such, they are just elevated to that high position, even though they do not possess a proper understanding of what a republic is, or what role they should perform in their new position as guardians”.

    “If they have been trained, they would always use those so called discretionary powers in consultation with the main stakeholders. This applies to the whole range of work they do as guardians, such as the appointment or the dismissal of a Prime Minister, prorogue, convene or dissolve Parliaments, and fixing dates for conducting elections”.

    Dr W has not said directly how he thinks President Sirisena measures up in this regard, but we can draw our own conclusions on the evidence before us.

    One imagines the President would not have acted without seeking advice but of whom did he seek such advice – those capable of providing competent and objective counsel or those only too willing to present what is most agreeable to his ear?

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 200 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically disabled after 7 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.