brand logo

SJB fears Govt. will dilute 22A at committee stage

11 Oct 2022

  • Seeks talks with AG before next week’s debate
  • TNA slams 22A as ‘useless’, female MPs disappointed
  • BY Mirudhula Thambiah
The Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB) has urged the Government to convene a discussion with the Opposition parties, the Attorney General (AG), and the Government to decide on appropriate amendments to the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution Bill prior to next week’s scheduled two-day debate and vote on the Bill, fearing that the Government may introduce “unconstitutional” provisions to it despite the Supreme Court (SC) already having given its special determination. Chief Opposition Whip, SJB MP, and Attorney Lakshman Kiriella, speaking to The Morning yesterday (10), stressed that the Government and the Opposition should sit down to discuss the appropriate amendments to the said Bill.  “We want the Speaker of Parliament to sit with the Government and the Opposition, together with the AG, to discuss the Bill and the amendments to it, following which, it should be taken up for a debate in Parliament,” he added.  Kiriella also noted: “But I feel that they are hiding the amendments. Once they bring the amendments at the committee stage, even if an amendment is not sanctioned by the AG, it cannot be changed. There is no judicial review after that stage in Sri Lanka. This is the fear we have regarding the secrecy of such things. We are open to the amendments proposed by the SC, but if they try to bring about amendments at the committee stage, we will not be receptive. Under our present Parliament, at the committee stage, even if the Government passes an unconstitutional amendment, it would be valid. There is no judicial review after that.  “After the Bill is passed in Parliament, the SC cannot review the Bill. Even though Justice and Constitutional Reforms Minister Dr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe (PC) says that he is comfortable with the amendments called for by the SC, they might get someone else to propose unconstitutional amendments, such as changing the dissolution of Parliament from two-and-a-half years to four-and-a-half years, and allowing dual citizens to enter Parliament.  “Even regarding the 20th Amendment to the Constitution, they messed things up, since they never consulted the Opposition, and made the proposals outside Parliament, through some lawyers who appeared for then-President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in his cases. They formulated the Bill by themselves and brought it to Parliament. Now, they are trying to reverse the 20th Amendment to the Constitution,” he added.  When queried as to whether the SJB would vote for the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, against it, or abstain from voting, he noted that it depends on the amendments that the Government wants to implement, such as whether they want to bring the dissolution of Parliament from to two-and-a-half years to four-and-a-half years.  “We cannot agree with that, and we cannot allow dual citizens to enter Parliament,” he stressed.  Meanwhile, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) has taken the stance that the proposed 22nd Amendment to the Constitution Bill does not achieve anything of import, and thus emphasised the need for a new Constitution, pointing out that the draft Constitution presented in Parliament in 2019 resolves all current problems, including the abolishment of the Executive Presidency, and addressing the Tamil national problem.  In this regard, TNA Spokesman and MP M.A. Sumanthiran (PC) said that the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution Bill does not achieve anything, even though it is marketed to the people as bringing about a reduction in the Executive powers of the President. He noted that after the SC special determination, it has been diluted to the point where even after the passage of the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution, the President will continue to hold the full extent of powers vested in him under the 20th Amendment to the Constitution. Therefore, Sumanthiran charged, there is no point in deceiving the people by passing this Amendment.  “We cannot make any proposals now that the SC has made its determination. You cannot change anything now,” he added.  Sumanthiran further noted: “Our proposal is this – don’t just waste time tinkering with the Constitution like this, as it does not make any difference at all. We want them to bring a new Constitution altogether that has been agreed upon. The President himself presented a draft in 2019 to Parliament. This solves everything. It abolishes the Executive Presidency, resolves the Tamil national ethnic question, and addresses the Parliamentary election process.” Meanwhile, the Women Parliamentarians’ Caucus is of the view that no amendment has awarded any gender quota, in the form of reserved seats or otherwise, to ensure female representation in the Constitutional Council, and that the Bill does not expressly contain any substantial provisions aimed at ensuring gender equality or social Inclusion. Accordingly, the Caucus noted that the Bill should be revised to incorporate a gender quota in the Constitution, thereby allowing women to be included in decision-making entities, including the commissions and the Constitutional Council. It was also recommended to suggest a quota for a female MP to be appointed to the post of Speaker or Deputy Speaker. It is also recommended that Article 16 of the Constitution be amended to ensure that the provisions in the Fundamental Rights Chapter, particularly Article 12, override the restrictions arising from retaining old laws, including personal laws such as the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act, and the Thesawalamai Law, the latter which concerns the property rights of married women – all of which deny equality for women.  


More News..