23 October, 2020

Blog

Transformation From Constitutional Disequilibrium To Sustainable Equilibrium? Is it Possible?

By Laksiri Fernando

Dr. Laksiri Fernando

Dr. Laksiri Fernando

The Constitution doesn’t belong to a bunch of judges and lawyers. It belongs to you.” – Anthony Kennedy (US Supreme Court Judge)

Traditionally, ‘constitutional equilibrium’ talked about the balance between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Independence of the judiciary was of paramount importance. Montesquieu in his ‘The Spirit of Laws’ (1748), argued that England preserved constitutional equilibrium and thus human liberty because of separation of powers and checks and balances. While this is still valid and fundamental, there are many other aspects of constitutional equilibrium or disequilibrium that we need to be concerned about under modern circumstances.

Sri Lanka has gone through quite a number of constitutional upheavals particularly in the 1970s and in recent times. Take the recent examples of constitutional amendments of the 17th, the 18th, and the 19th. They were going back and forth, let alone the dictatorial orientation of the 18th Amendment. A primary objective of a new constitution, therefore, has to be to give some stability to the constitutional system. The rationale or the felt need for a new constitution is long standing while this is going to be the fourth constitution of Sri Lanka, if it is successful, since independence in 1948. Admittedly, therefore, there has been some continuous disequilibrium in the constitutional system in the country.

Why? So far no constitution was in a position to find the ‘greatest happiness of the greatest number,’ reducing the suffering for all possible souls. I am here invoking the utilitarian theory of Jeremy Bentham (‘Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation’ – 1789). It is too idealistic to think that a constitution can satisfy ‘all and sundry.’ The greatest satisfaction might be the best achievable. As the Buddha said, when there is Dukkha (a problem), there is Nirodha (a solution). When the Smudhaya (causes) are identified, one can find the Magga (the way for the solution). Here in Sri Lanka we have a constitutional instability or crisis. Therefore, there should be a way out. Finding that ‘way out’ is the task for the constituent assembly formed by the Parliament.

Continuous Instability

The first constitution, popularly called the Soulbury constitution, was primarily a document drafted by the colonial state makers (Lord Soulbury and Sir Ivor Jennings), of course in consultation with the elected representatives of the country. This constitution lasted for 25 years from 1947 to 1972 without much upheaval. In contrast, the first indigenous and the first republican constitution of 1972 survived only for six years. It showed the acrimonious political culture prevailed in the country. The second republican constitution of 1978 is still in operation for 38 years, but largely due to its rigidity than any inherent quality of popular acceptance. Since 1994, there has been several fervent efforts to overhaul that constitution but without any success. In August 2000, the effort to inaugurate a new constitution came very close, but failed, the opposition members of parliament burning the draft agreed by the leaders during by-partisan negotiations.

One advantage of constitution making process today is the existence of a ‘national unity’ government of the two main political parties, the UNP and the SLFP, also with the connivance of the official opposition, the TNA, representing mainly the Northern Tamil community. Therefore, at least on appearance, there seems to be some broad consensus for the need for a new constitution. This could however be illusory, considering the rifts within the ‘national unity’ government itself on some of the key constitutional issues, and the stance of the almost breakaway ‘joint opposition’ from the SLFP/UPFA led by the former president, Mahinda Rajapaksa, among other factors. In a recently held ‘foot-march’ (Pada Yathra) by the joint opposition (28 July – 1 August), one of the main slogans was that ‘the new constitution is a death trap.’ In addition, on the issue of passing the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) Bill on 11 August, the behaviour of the joint opposition has heralded what they might do during the inauguration of a new constitution.

There is no apparent readymade agreement between the main political parties, the UNP, the SLFP, the TNA or the JVP, except the need for a new constitution, reforming many of the institutional and legal anomalies of the present constitutional system, and creating a balance between divergent political views in order that a workable constitutional equilibrium is created for a foreseeable period. This is by no means an easy task. What elements could create a sustainable ‘constitutional equilibrium’ is also not a self-evident matter.

What Constitute Constitutional Equilibrium?

There can be different understandings of what people mean by ‘constitutional equilibrium.’ But here it is mainly used to denote ‘necessary political consensuses’ for its long term sustainability. A major necessary component in this equilibrium is people’s trust in the system. As a US Supreme Court Judge, Anthony Kennedy, has declared, “The Constitution doesn’t belong to a bunch of judges and lawyers. It belongs to you.

There can be another meaning, as highlighted at the beginning and not very distance from the above, to mean ‘equilibrium between various institutions and power centres.’ This is about ‘checks and balances’ not only between the three traditional branches of government – the legislative, executive and judicial – but also between the provincial councils and the central government. As Sri Lanka is and going to be a devolved system of government, the latter equilibrium is much more important and desired. It is assumed that if an equilibrium could be achieved in the institutional context, then it would be easy to achieve equilibrium or consensus for sustainability of the constitutional system as a whole.

Then what about the trust of the people over the constitutional system? Unless there is a necessary trust, there cannot be a sustainable constitutional equilibrium in the country. This is also called ‘constitutional legitimacy.’ Wasn’t this a reason for two insurrections in the country in the South (1971) and in the North (1983-1987)? I would count the movements after 1987 both in the North and in the South as ‘terrorism’ and not insurrection.

Three Major Controversies

There are three major areas where constitutional consensus or equilibrium obviously is necessary. First or most popular is the question of ‘presidential versus a cabinet’ system. There has been a long debate on that theme beginning from the initial works of N. M. Perera and A. Jeyaratnam Wilson. This may appear the most settled issue particularly after the 19th Amendment, nevertheless there are several leftover issues. Two of which are: (1) whether all the executive powers should be scrapped from the presidency, and (2) how even a ‘ceremonial president’ should be elected or selected.

The second is the question of ‘proportional representation (PR) versus first-past-the post system (FPP).’ This has also been discussed for a long period although not that systematically like the first issue. One reason seems to be the technical dimensions involved in any electoral discussion. It is not so much of the FPP that is advocated, but having a constituency (seat) system where the electors retaining a clear representative to represent them in parliament. Although one objective to advocate a quasi-FPP system initially was to have governmental stability through clear majorities, the concerns seem to settle down today as the new thinking accepts the merits of ‘consensual governments’ rather than one party dominance. The remaining issues seem to point out a necessary balance rather than one against the other.

The third and the most controversial issue today emerges out of the ‘unitary versus federal’ debate. This has been a never ending dispute in the country linked to the ethnic conflict. Although there is a system of devolution with provincial councils in operation, still there are ‘pull factors’ wanting to re-establish the old unitary system. On the other hand, there are strong ‘push factors’ asking for federalism or even beyond. What kind of a balance of power, or popularly called ‘power sharing,’ could be drawn between the central government and the provincial councils would be the key issue. Much of the efforts of the present constitution makers, if not the whole constituent assembly, should be devoted to this issue, given the sensitivity of the matters involved. It should also be hundred percent transparent to win over the people’s trust.

Other Issues

There are of course several other polarized issues such as ‘secular-state versus foremost place for Buddhism’ and the merits and demerits of ‘unicameral verses bicameral’ legislative system. In most of the above underscored controversial issues, there can be a middle ground which could be achieved, if the parties are willing. The ‘middle path’ is the best. However, ‘unicameral-bicameral’ dispute is something where a middle position cannot be achieved by the nature of the issue. It has to be either unicameral or bicameral. If a proper and a meaningful devolved system is agreed upon, it is most likely that the constitution might go for a bicameral system. Then the issues would be about the weightage given for the centre and the periphery for electing/selecting such a second chamber or a Senate.

People’s Trust

The main premise of the constitutional system in Sri Lanka, like in many other democratic countries is the concept of people’s sovereignty. What does it mean? Is it only a ‘cake decoration’ or just a popular slogan to deceive people, while the political elite holding the actual sovereignty? This is not a well debated issue in the country while there have been few attempts. There are of course several devices, apart from the system of elections or the freedom of expression and protest, which gives the impression that the people are sovereign. One is the provisions for referendum on selected matters. The other is the possibility for the people to go before the Supreme Court on fundamental rights or to mitigate legislation or executive action which goes against the constitution or its provisions. However, there are precarious limits. The full range of judicial review is also not within the present constitution. Therefore one can argue that the reinstatement of ‘full judicial review’ could go a long way in establishing people’s sovereignty and thus the trust on the constitutional system.

However, the apparent gap between the constitutional system and the people are considerable. It may appear trivial, but one can raise the question whether the language and the contents of the constitution are comprehensible for an ordinary person. If a constitution is not only for the judges and the lawyers, then a constitution or its major parts should be understood by the ordinary people. It should be citizen-friendly in its language as well.

The National Youth Survey conducted in 2009 (only survey of this kind to my knowledge) amply revealed that particularly among the youth, the alienation is quite high in respect of the political, constitutional and the state (institutional) system. There have been no direct surveys conducted to gather the opinions of the people on various constitutional questions in the country. However, partial observations or studies reveal that the knowledge or opinions of the people are quite low and shrouded in misconceptions. For example, as one constitutional expert has opined, when many people say a ‘unitary state’ what they mean is a ‘united country.’ Whether this is the case or not, the fact remains that the general knowledge on constitutional matters is abysmally low. This is one reason for the continuous imbalance between the constitutional system and the people’s aspirations, while the unscrupulous political leaders utilizing the situation for their ulterior political ends.

What Might be the Best?

The short answer is the Middle Path. The transformation of the present constitutional disequilibrium (and also ambiguities) into sustainable equilibrium is not an easy task. It requires truly a bi-partisan approach. As discussed before, almost all the issues appear to be ‘bipolar’ due to historical, theoretical, international and political circumstances. At the same time, that nature of the controversies signify the possibility of achieving a middle ground on all or most of the issues, if there is ‘political will.’ The present national unity government, President Maithripala Sirisena as the head, is in a better position to achieve such a middle ground, compared to the previous historical occasions of 1972, 1978 or the year 2000.

For the first time, a constitution making effort has taken some great pains through what termed as the Public Representation Committee (PRC) to gather the opinions of the people. Whatever the weaknesses of this process or the outcome (the Report!), the attempt is commendable. The constitution making process should be transparent and should not be confined to the Committee Rooms of the Parliament. There should be more open discussions on the media (printed, electronic and social) and there is a pressing need for weekly briefings by the Constituent Assembly spokespersons on the day to day progress. Most important is to win the ‘trust of the people’ and the outcome/s of the process should be people’s friendly in its true sense. After all, unlike in the past occasions, the matter has to be finally decided by the people at a referendum.

(You may read the full proposal submitted by the author, Laksiri Fernando, to the Public Representation Committee (PRC), unedited, on 3 March 2016 here answering all 20 questions raised by the PRC. This was not published before, and now published by the author with the intention of keeping the constitutional debate alive and going. Additional articles are listed at the end of the proposal, accessible directly by clicking the links.)

Annex I  – Draft Chapter III – Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms – Click here to read

Annex II – Chapter XII (Proposals) – Local Government System: Objects, Structures and Functions – Click here to read

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 1
    0

    Dr. Laksiri Fernando

    RE: Transformation From Constitutional Disequilibrium To Sustainable Equilibrium? Is it Possible?

    There is a field called Non-Equilibrium Thermodynamics. Para Equilibrium?

    In Lanka, the Land of Native Veddah Aethho, occupied by Paras, we have non-equilibrium Politics and non-equilibrium ethnic conflicts, because one set of Paras claim that they are not Paras, while the others are Paras.

    For Equilibrium, All the Paras shoulkd get back to their homeland, India, Hindia, Baharat.

    Non-equilibrium thermodynamics. The Paras are not in equilibrium,

    Non-equilibrium thermodynamics is a branch of thermodynamics that deals with physical systems that are not in thermodynamic equilibrium but can be adequately described in terms of variables (non-equilibrium state variables) that represent an extrapolation of the variables used to specify the system in thermodynamic equilibrium. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics is concerned with transport processes and with the rates of chemical reactions. It relies on what may be thought of as more or less nearness to thermodynamic equilibrium. Non-equilibrium thermodynamics is a work in progress, not an established edifice.

    • 1
      0

      Dear Prof. Laksiri,
      It is sad that Sinhalese who label themselves as moderates are unable to come out of the supremacist mindset. Please see the recent decision of the Federal Party, the main constituent of TNA, which unanimoulsy resolved to demand a federal solution for the merged north and east. So how are you going to sell your proposal to Tamils. The moment you name the constitution as unitary, it will be a non-starter for Tamils. Are you going to force Tamils to accept injustice to please Sinhalese. As I have stated before, unless and until there is foreign involvement Tamils will never get justice from Sinhala dominated government.

      In a unitray state, parliament controlled by Sinhalese is supreme. In this you cannot share power as power can only be decentralised and not devolved. What you suggest will not deliver justice to Tamils. Please see the situation in Kosovo where there is intervention by NATO with their forces controlling the ground. All the lands inhabited by Serbs have been brought under a federal state, and all the lands belonging to Montenegro alienated by Muslims have been returned. In both times there were protests by Muslims including firing of rockets into the capital, but NATO forces put them down to establish peace with justice.

  • 1
    1

    The ongoing Economic and Political dislocation is getting worse.
    A constitutional crisis is imminent.
    There for USA ,UK and Norway that pressure for MS that entirely responsibility for the foreign power it fall on ruling of TNA and JVP bloc.

    In fact the Proposed constitution revision or NEW a disaster of separatism of name by the Tamil “Federalism” suggest by UNP-Ranil W…,CBK of Tamil decedent neo-liberalism of ex-SLFP and MS of New UNP’s and Wijnayake report is drawing irresistibly down fall is near.

    Only way out of constitutional crisis and the only remedy for political dislocation and undermined democracy by UNP authority rule regime of Ranil W…the is that strange of misquotation of constitution by the writer.

  • 0
    0

    There is a great opportunity for achieving a near equlibrium if there is a true political will remains with the leadership of the UNP_SLFP_TNA. It is also true that there are going to be huge threat from many sides. Internally, the main threats are:
    1. Fundamentalists.
    – Relegious
    – Race
    2. Opportunists.
    – Political
    – Economic

  • 1
    0

    I am in total agreement,Prof:Laksiri on the issue of Language rights-Chapter 4.

    The official languages of Srilanka shall be Sinhalese,Tamil and English,and ending with the last para:
    ….The State shall promote and support the progressive implementation of English as the main medium of instruction in all institutions of higher education….

    It has taken 60years,after so much bloodshed to realise the folly of 1956!

    Chapter 2 of the present Constitution under the caption-Buddhism is stated thus:
    The Republic of Silanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana,while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14[1][e].

    With all due respect to you,your proposal is not much different from the existing statement;Perhaps,the extremely sensitive nature of the subject,may not permit any other formulation which could be a rallying point to derail the whole process of delivering a New Constitution!

  • 0
    0

    Laksiri Fernando, That you are so fond of justifying your own end, you take immense pleasure in interposing arguments at the wrong place and at the wrong time.

    Let me point out the appalling hypocrisy of one such instance, from this piece itself.

    ‘One advantage of constitution making process today is the existence of a ‘national unity’ government of the two main political parties, the UNP and the SLFP, also with the connivance of the official opposition, the TNA, representing mainly the Northern Tamil community’.

    1) The two political parties, UNP and SLFP, cannot be called ‘main’ by any stretch of imagination. The parties are both benefactors of Sinhala majoritarianism. There is no room for an inclusive Tamil community in either of the two parties.

    2) The ‘national unity’ government if new, is only in the name. The past Governments stand testimony to their united roles in their goals and objectives. The two parties are the two faces of one and the same coin, – Sinhala hegemony.

    3) Your objective is conspicuous in its transparency, by your bring in TNA into the fold.

    4) Your shameless claim that TNA represents mainly the Northern Tamil community is so hollow that it leaks of profound malice. TNA has a far better claim to represent the entire Tamil community, save hill-country Tamils, than the phoney ‘National Party’ claim of UNP, or the ‘national unity’ government of UNP-SLFP.

    I wish to leave it here. (For, I haven’t proceeded reading beyond the sentence I have referred to.)

  • 2
    0

    “A Wolf in sheep’s clothing”;
    This phrase originated in a sermon by Jesus recorded in the Christian New Testament: “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves (Gospel of Matthew 7:15, King James Version). The sermon then suggests that their true nature will be revealed by their actions (by their fruits shall ye know them, verse 16)”.

    For Sinhala-Buddhists this is a very good lesson. Under the political chaotic environment and the context of the writer’s compilation it is about the agents (not prophets) of Machiavellians occupying the seat of power in Colombo. Contacts with these agents playing the roles contrary to their real character is dangerous, particularly false teachers and spin doctors.

    The time has come for the citizens to recognize agents of some political masters and their role of duplicity when defining our future. Obviously a meaningful constitution that safeguards and protects Sovereignty and the unitary status of Sri Lanka is an important subject but it should not be allowed to be tinkered by the sworn enemies of Sinhala-Buddhists. It looks like every time we have failed to recognize the danger paused to our beloved country by these sworn enemies of Sinhala-Buddhists. As a result we left the responsibility of drafting a new constitution mainly in the hands of atheists and the perennial enemies of Sinhala people especially in the hands of anti-Buddhist. For example, we continue to suffer under constitution introduced in 1977 by the “Anti Sinhala-Buddhist” forces of Colombo.

    The title says; Constitutional Disequilibrium To Sustainable Equilibrium? Is it Possible?

    Hell of an idea; I will say again; “Be aware of a Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing”.
    Laksiri Fernando, have you forgotten or did you assume that we woke-up only yesterday to find out the country is in a mess, the parliament is occupied by rogues, common criminals, Machiavellians are occupying the seat of power and there is a “CONSTITUTIONAL DISEQULIBRIUM”? This situation was created by guys like you and the political elites responsible for sponsoring you and other agents. Whatever touched by a “wolf in Sheep’s clothing” has brought disaster, destruction, war and turned Sri Lanka into a failed state, be it Constitutional reforms, Electoral reforms, Educational reforms, Economic reforms, Banking reforms, Judiciary reforms or even a simple task such as appointing the governor of CB or the chairman of SriLankan Airlines.

    Isn’t it strange that the author of “Constitutional Disequilibrium” also have advocated new approaches to solve cancer ridden constitution and governing practices, last week it was with the help of “Civil Society” (another word for NGOs) about two months ago, hidden agenda to deny the place that should be offered to Buddhism in the Sinhala-Buddhist nation under the guise of attacking BBS. This time; you are preaching to us (Audience dominated by Buddhists) on “Middle Path” with well crafted evasive arguments. Laksiri Fernando ; For you ”Middle Path” is an academic hypothesis. But for us; the True Buddhists, “IT IS A WAY OF LIFE” practiced for more than 2500 years.

    Shame, Shame and Shame. You are preaching to the choir, obviously as you do not respect Buddhism or Sinhala Buddhists, you may pretend as long as you want to that Sri Lanka is not a Buddhist nation. It is only figment of your imagination. Did you ever believe in “Middle Path”; the concept presented in Buddhism. “MIDDLE PATH” was the cornerstone of the FIRST sermon of Lord Buddha. It is like air we breathe every day. For, you it is a term to be used in trickery and merely a baseless academic exercise.

    Buddhism introduced the concept of Parliamentary system, Democratic principles and the Democratic tools more than 2500 years ago. Furthermore, it has taught us “No political system, no matter how ideal it may appear to be, can bring about peace and happiness as long as the people in the system are dominated by greed, hatred and delusion.”

    Finally, the path to the sustainability is well explained by Lord Buddha in the rules for Good Government, known as ‘Dasa Raja Dharma’. These ten rules can be applied even today by any government if desires to rule the country peacefully. The ten rules are:
    1) Be liberal and avoid selfishness,
    2) Maintain a high moral character,
    3) Be prepared to sacrifice one’s own pleasure for the well-being of the subjects,
    4) Be honest and maintain absolute integrity,
    5) Be kind and gentle,
    6) Lead a simple life for the subjects (citizens) to emulate,
    7) Be free from hatred of any kind,
    8) exercise non-violence,
    9) Practice patience, and
    10) Respect public opinion to promote peace and harmony.
    If you do care, you and my fellow readers can understand what is wrong with “so-called” Sinhala Buddhist leaders of Sri Lanka. Since 1953 there has never been a single true Buddhist leader, some were and (are still) Non-Buddhists masquerading as Buddhists others, were blinded by hunger for power. All of them have violated the above rules. That is the root cause for disequilibrium.

    Finally, The Transformation From Constitutional Disequilibrium To Sustainable Equilibrium in SRI LANKA is possible only after Non- Buddhists including you acknowledge that Sri Lanka is a Buddhist country and SINHELA people were the founders of the SOVERIEGN and UNITARY state of Sri Lanka. Above all, the majority Sinhala-Buddhists must rally around an authentic SINHALA-BUDDHIST leader. From that day onward there will be sustainable equilibrium according to the principles enunciated by our only master; Lord Buddha. Not according to what SWRDB, JRJ, FELIX DIAS B, PREMADASA, CHANDRIKA, RAJAPAKSA, RANIL or MAITHRIPALA said. (other minions are irrelevant) said.

    Ranbandu C.

  • 0
    0

    Dear Professor Laksiri Fernando :

    You said

    “This is also called ‘constitutional legitimacy.’ Wasn’t this a reason for two insurrections in the country in the South (1971) and in the North (1983-1987)? I would count the movements after 1987 both in the North and in the South as ‘terrorism’ and not insurrection.”

    I would like to know what the members of this forum think about the proposal that the prime duty of the constitution and the government for that matter is the safety and the well being of its citizens. From that point of view, preventing riots and insurrections is the most important thing, with justice coming a close second. This is the very reason that the above ‘ insurrections’ are mentioned as a problem: to the rebel, insurrections is not a problem but a solution.

    The representative election system and the presidency are irrelevant by comparison, although important. This distinction on public safety and well being as being above all else is not something that I have heard mentioned in public discourse.

    Of course there can be and will be political changes, but these must take place peacefully, possibly folliwing the exemplary “Paada Yathra” of the joint opposition. Apart for some carefully planned hooting, no lives were lost. Could this be the future of insurrections in our country? I certainly hope so. I am not sure whose office will be hooted at next and by whom.

    I believe public safety and well being has a bright future in this country, if we believe the current government.

    For the views of your fellow citizens please see here:

    https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/final-report-of-public-representations-committee-on-constitutional-reform-full-texts-in-three-languages/

    What do the members of this forum think?

  • 0
    0

    Dear Dr.
    Talking of equilibrium and Constitutional disequilibrium, I wonder if you will first talk about establishing an equilibrium in possible areas in order to relieve common people from being forced to live oppressed due to a misconceived or due to a forced and wrongly placed security threat in the North and East of Sri Lanka now?

  • 0
    0

    The writer has that belongs to poor performance and wrong reading of The modern capitalism growing in developing countries, which Disequilibrium in whole system of developing capitalism in emerging nations.

    The Disequilibrium is that an isolated phenomenal that confined to “Constitution “related issues it has all connection disorder of direct arbitrage capital and labour.

    There is no possibility to “sustainability to equilibrium” in dirham system of capitalism of neo-liberal politics of UNP -Ranil W… MS and CBK headed by the school of thought and current regime in power rely of foreign power base.

    The proposed “constitution” is not Represtantation of majority masses of all nationalities, while is road for dismantle of nation unity and sovereignty, will be surrender which Independent and Democratic values & norms has been grown last 68 years.

    The writer blind follower on Westerns political mythology of ‘Constitution’ on diffusion of ideas on behalf of them since long time of his carrier of work.

    The so-called bourgeois “constitutional experts” living on myth of illusions of abstract sense upper class work for their means of living that high standard of bourgeoisie life style. They are catering for their own sustsnibility not that sustsnibility of People’s that the majority wish of ongoing capitalist development.
    The era is democratic revolution but there is differences between capitalism and democracy has been which address by Marxist.

    The discharge of Free and fair progressive Role of Capitalist development by domination of monopoly Imperialism of US headed capitalism has been disclosure of that diminishing substitution only by Socialism guided by Marxism.

    I have nothing to say more than what Lenin said after 1917 October Revolution In Russia by Bolsheviks;
    ” The majority of these so-called socialists ,who have “read in books” about socialism ,who have never seriously thought over the matters, are unable to consider that by “leap” the teachers of socialism meant turning-point on the world historical scale and the leaps of this kind extent over decades and even longer periods.
    Naturally in such times the notorious “intelligentsia” provides an infinite numbers of mourners of the dead. Some mourn over the Constituent Assembly ,others mourn over the bourgeois discipline, others again mourn over the capitalist system, still others mourn over the cultured landlords and still other again mourn of imperialist Great Power policy ,etc.,etc.”…..Vol. 27 page 273.

    At the present political context and environment in Sri Lankan and its task of change of “constitutional “…..” sustainability of equilibrium” is difficult complex and dangerous situation in by foreign power involvements and engaging of manoeuvring the period of retreating of counter-revolution led by UNP leadership .

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.