- Claims same unprecedented in P’ment history
The Parliamentary Opposition has claimed that seeking the Attorney General’s (AG) advice on the no-confidence motion (NCM) against Speaker of Parliament Dr Jagath Wickramaratne is unprecedented in Parliament’s history and insisted that the motion be taken up for debate without undue delay.
Speaking to The Daily Morning yesterday (19), Chief Opposition Whip Gayantha Karunathilleka said that the Government had not refused to debate the motion but had said it needed to obtain the AG’s advice before fixing a date.
“As far as I know, advice has never been sought from the AG on an NCM in the history of Parliament. When we asked the Parliamentary Secretary-General (SG) about it, she (Attorney Kushani Rohanadheera) also said that there had never been such a procedure. But, since the Ruling Party has now stated that it is necessary, a date will be fixed as soon as the AG’s advice is received,” he said.
He also questioned the Government’s explanation that the motion contained technical defects, pointing out that Leader of the House Bimal Rathnayake had initially told Parliament that the Government was ready to debate it on the earliest possible date.
“Initially, the House Leader said in Parliament that they were ready to debate this NCM on the earliest possible date. It is only now that they are talking about technical issues. The Ruling Party initially offered a one-day debate, which we said would not provide sufficient time. It was when we said that we needed two or three days that they said there were technical issues with the motion. If we had agreed to their proposal, would these technical issues have arisen?” he queried.
Karunathilleka also said that obtaining the AG’s advice should not become a reason for keeping the motion pending for an extended period.
“They cannot take a very long time just to get the AG’s advice,” he said.
The NCM against the Speaker was submitted to the SG on 9 October by 44 Opposition MPs representing the Samagi Jana Balawegaya, the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna, the New Democratic Front and independent groups.
The motion alleges violations of the Constitution, the Anti-Corruption Act, the Offences Against Public Property Act, the Penal Code, the Right to Information Act, the Code of Conduct for MPs and the Standing Orders of Parliament.