Before completing two years in office, the National People’s Power (NPP) Government has been faced with No-Confidence Motions (NCMs) brought by Opposition parties against two of its ministers. Notably, both motions were introduced within a span of just three months.
The first NCM, against former Minister of Energy Kumara Jayakody, was handed over to the Speaker on 19 March over controversies surrounding coal procurement for power generation and past procurement allegations. It was debated in Parliament on 10 April. As expected, it was defeated by a majority of 104 votes.
However, following President Anura Kumara Dissanayake’s appointment of a special committee to investigate the coal procurement issue, Jayakody resigned from his ministerial post along with his Ministry Secretary on 17 April. He stated that he did so in order to ensure an independent investigation.
The second NCM was brought against Justice Minister Harshana Nanayakkara by Opposition parties in July in relation to the recent brutal riots at the Negombo Prison.
Although Minister Nanayakkara immediately accepted responsibility for the riots, which resulted in the deaths of over 30 prison officials and inmates, Opposition parties demanded his resignation.
When the motion was debated and put to a vote in Parliament on 24 July, 152 votes were cast against it and 36 in favour. It appears that even the 40 Members of Parliament (MPs) from the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB), led by Opposition Leader Sajith Premadasa, did not vote unanimously. The motion was defeated by a majority of 116 votes.
A question of taking responsibility
Opposition parties brought these NCMs knowing full well that defeat was certain. The NPP Government holds a two-thirds majority (159 seats) in the 225-member Parliament. To pass an NCM, the Opposition requires 113 votes.
While these motions pose no real threat to the Government, the Opposition – lacking the capacity to organise meaningful political struggles against the ruling power – has little choice but to rely on parliamentary procedures. During debates, Opposition members simply deliver speeches against the Government for their own satisfaction and leave.
Although Opposition politicians hold press conferences announcing efforts to unite rival parties, no practical steps are being taken towards unity.
Responding during the parliamentary debate on the NCM against him, Minister Nanayakkara said: “Those currently out on bail from courts and those afraid of going to prison are the ones who want me to resign. Therefore, I will not resign.”
Rejecting the allegations against him, he further noted that Opposition members were raising accusations based merely on social media rumours.
SJB Kalutara District MP Ajith P. Perera, who submitted the motion and initiated the debate, accused Justice Minister Nanayakkara of failing to step down after accepting responsibility for the Negombo Prison riots.
Perera noted that under the Westminster parliamentary system, taking responsibility culminates in resignation. He cited the precedent of 11 November 1988, when then Justice Minister Dr. Nissanka Wijeyeratne resigned along with his deputy following a violent incident at the Welikada Prison in which two inmates were killed.
However, the same Nissanka Wijeyeratne was also the Justice Minister during Black July in 1983, when 53 Tamil prisoners were massacred in the Welikada Prison. Tamil inmates were killed over two consecutive days by thugs brought from outside as well as by fellow inmates.
Had proper security measures been taken after the first day’s killings, the second day’s tragedy could have been prevented. Dr. Wijeyeratne, cited by Perera as a role model for the current Justice Minister, did not accept responsibility or resign over the massacre of Tamil prisoners; in fact, he remained in office for another five years.
Sajith’s threat of a people’s revolution
The NPP Government does not seem to give much weight to the recent opposition from political parties and legal associations regarding its plan to extend the retirement age of Court of Appeal and Supreme Court judges by two years.
The Cabinet approved the proposal last Monday (27 July). The Government is expected to proceed with drafting the 22nd amendment to the Constitution to give it effect.
It remains unclear how far the Opposition’s campaign – arguing that raising the retirement age of superior court judges interferes with judicial independence – resonates with the public.
While Professor G.L. Peiris stated that the Government could not introduce the 22nd amendment without holding a referendum to seek public approval, Cabinet Spokesman Nalinda Jayatissa and Justice Minister Nanayakkara maintained that no referendum was necessary.
Meanwhile, Opposition Leader Premadasa warned the Government that a massive people’s revolution would erupt in Sri Lanka, urging them not to forget the events in India.
Strongly condemning the proposed constitutional amendment as an attempt to turn the Judiciary into a puppet of the Executive, Premadasa told the media that the NPP had received a mandate to abolish the executive presidency, not to subjugate the Judiciary. He added that the public would not stand idly by while the Government pursued a unilateral, authoritarian path.
Warning the Government not to forget the events in India, why did the Opposition Leader fail to recall the Aragalaya – the popular uprising four years ago in his own country that ousted the Government of President Gotabaya Rajapaksa?
The NPP was able to capture power by leveraging the post-Aragalaya landscape, which marked the first popular revolt in South Asia to unseat a government. However, despite being the Opposition Leader at the time, Premadasa failed to make effective use of that situation, demonstrating a lack of political astuteness.
Now threatening the NPP Government with a people’s revolution, Premadasa should first demonstrate his ability to mobilise people for at least a small protest in Colombo.
With barely two months remaining before the Government completes two years in office, Opposition parties, including Premadasa’s SJB, have been unable to organise even a minor street demonstration. Yet, they continue to issue threats of a people’s revolution.
(The writer is a senior journalist based in Colombo)
(The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the official position of this publication)