"To us all towns are one, all men our kin. |
Home | Trans State Nation | Tamil Eelam | Beyond Tamil Nation | Comments |
Home >Tamils: a Trans State Nation > Struggle for Tamil Eelam > Conflict Resolution: Tamil Eelam - Sri Lanka > Bandaranaike - Chelvanayakam Pact, 1957 >Dudley Senanayake - Chelvanayakam Agreement, 1965 > District Councils, 1968 > District Development Councils, 1979 > Annexure "C" Proposals, 1983> All Party Conference, 1983/84 >Thimpu Talks, 1985 > Indo Sri Lanka Working Paper, 1985 > "December 19th Proposals", 1986 > Exchange of Letters between India & Sri Lanka, 1987 > Indo Sri Lanka Agreement, 1987 > 13th Amendment to Sri Lanka Constitution - Devolution or Comic Opera?, 1988 > Sri Lanka/LTTE Talks 1989/90 > Select Committee - Interim Report,1992 > Chandrika - LTTE Talks: 1994/95 > Chandrika's 'Devolution' Proposals:1995/2001 > Norwegian Conflict Resolution Initiative - 2001 todate.
Constitutional trinity of marvels
Let us, therefore, take one by one the precious and inestimable boons granted to the Tamil people by the 13th Amendment. The boons are three in number, a trinity of marvels: a Provincial Governor, a Provincial Board of Ministers with a Chief Minister, and a Provincial Council. At the head of this constitutional Trinity stands the Provincial Governor. Who will select and ordain him? Who else, but the President of Sri Lanka. But that is not all. The Provincial Governor will hold office 'during the pleasure of the President'. When the President is no longer pleased with the Governor the President may dismiss him. And what is the constitutional reason for this provision that the Governor shall hold office during the pleasure of the President? The 13th Amendment does not leave us in doubt as to that reason. It declares that the Governor 'shall hold office, in accordance with Article 4(b), during the pleasure of the President'. It is a rather curiously phrased provision. What pray, is Article 4(b) of the Constitution? This is the Article which vests 'the executive power of the people' of Sri Lanka in the President. It is 'in accordance' with the provision of the Constitution which vests executive power in the President, that the Governor will hold office at the pleasure of the President. And so let us ask: wherein lies the constitutional link between the President being vested with executive power and the Governor holding office at the pleasure of the President - in what way is the latter 'in accordance' with the former? The connection, ofcourse, lies in the character of the office of the Governor created by the 13th Amendment. The Governor is no mere figurehead. The 13th Amendment enacts that executive power in the Province in relation to those matters which are within the competence of the Provincial Council, shall be exercised by the Governor. But if the Governor is to exercise executive power in provincial matters, then the Sri Lankan Constitution which vests executive power with respect to all matters in relation to the entirety of Sri Lanka, in the President, will be violated unless, ofcourse, such Governor holds office 'during the pleasure of the President' and is made subject to the control and direction of the President.
Executive power will be exercised by a Provincial Governor appointed by the Sinhala President In sum, executive power in relation to provincial matters, will be exercised by a Governor who will be appointed by the President, who will hold office 'during the pleasure' of the President, and who will exercise his executive powers as the faithful and loyal servant of the Executive President of Sri Lanka. That is the naked political and constitutional reality of the character of a Provincial Governor under the 13th Amendment. Perhaps, not surprisingly, in May 1988, two long standing Sinhala members of the ruling party who had served as Ministers in the Sri Lankan Cabinet resigned their offices and gratefully accepted appointment as Governors of the North Western and Uva Provinces, so that they may serve the President 'during his pleasure'. The circumstance that in early 1989, one of them resigned and accepted appointment as Prime Minister in President Premadasa's Cabinet serves to underline the close links that the Governors were intended to have with the Central government.
At that time, we could almost see in our minds eye those honourable and distinguished Sinhala gentlemen who the President of Sri Lanka would regard as being qualified to serve as the Governor of a Tamil Province. It was a vision which was later made real with the appointment of the Sinhala Major General Nalin Seneviratne, as the Governor of the Northern and Eastern Province. Major General Nalin Seneviratne had served as Commander in Chief of the Sri Lankan Army in the war against the Tamil militant movement and now that the war had been 'won', it was wholly appropriate that he should return to rule the Tamil people as their Governor. Here, let us recognise that it matters not whether the Northern Province is joined with the Eastern Province or not. If the Northern and Eastern Provinces are joined together, the Tamils will have one Governor. If they are not joined together, then the Tamils will have the privilege of having two Governors. Ofcourse, it is always possible that the Sri Lankan government, in a moment of great daring, at some future date, may even consider it safe to appoint a Tamil as a Governor for a Tamil Province - so long, that is, that such Tamil Governor will serve faithfully and loyally 'during the pleasure' of the President.
It would be an approach that would rival that of Hitler who sought to govern Norway in the 1940s through a Norwegian whose name was Quisling - and thereby made an everlasting contribution to the vocabulary of the English language. In the months ahead we shall know whether a Tamil Quisling will come forward to make a similar contribution to the richness of the Tamil language. But, be that as it may, let us move on and continue with our efforts to examine the provisions of the 13th Amendment seriously - however difficult that task may be. We have seen that the Amendment enacts that executive power in respect of provincial matters shall be exercised by the Governor. But it does not stop at that. It enacts that the Governor shall exercise such executive power 'either directly or through Ministers of the Board of Ministers, or through officers subordinate to him' .
As we shall see presently, the juxtaposition of the Board of Ministers with 'subordinate officers' is not without significance. But before we determine the way in which the Governor may exercise executive power 'through' Ministers let us first ask: in what way may a Governor exercise executive power 'through' subordinate officers and who are these 'subordinate officers'? The Provincial Governor will control the Provincial public service The subordinate officers through whom a Governor may exercise executive power are the members of the provincial public service. The Provincial Councils Act provides for the establishment of a provincial public service and enacts that the appointment, transfer, dismissal and disciplinary control of officers of the provincial public service of each Province shall be vested in the Governor of that Province. Furthermore, the Governor shall provide for and determine all matters relating to the terms and conditions of employment of officers of the provincial public service. And the Governor may delegate his powers of appointment to a Public Service Commission whose members shall be appointed by him. At the same time, the Governor is empowered to alter, vary or rescind any order of the Provincial Public Commission (whose members are, in any case, appointed by him!). The intention is abundantly clear. The administrative head of the Provincial Public Service will be the Provincial Governor and the Governor will thus be enabled to exercise executive power through officers employed in that service, who will be 'subordinate' to him and who are required to act on his directions. What then, is the role of the Board of Ministers and the Chief Minister? But if the 13th Amendment secures that executive power in relation to provincial matters shall be exercised by a Governor appointed by the President and holding office at his pleasure, and that he may exercise such power through a provincial public service which is subordinate to him, what then, is the role of the Board of Ministers and the Chief Minister? And in what way, may the Governor exercise executive power 'through Ministers of the Board of Ministers'?
But first, let us look at the way in which Ministers may be appointed. The Governor shall appoint as Chief Minister the member of the Provincial Council who in the Governor's opinion commands a support of a majority in the Provincial Council. Further, the Governor shall on the advice of the Chief Minister, appoint from among the members of the Provincial Council, no more than four other Ministers. These are, no doubt, unexceptionable provisions enacted in the best traditions of a constitutional democracy.
The 6th Amendment to the Constitution was declared by the International Commission of Jurists to be a violation of the right to freedom of expression enshrined in Article 25 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights - a Covenant to which Sri Lanka is a signatory. The Provincial Ministers before entering office are required to acquiesce in and become a willing party to Sri Lanka's violation of its international obligations. Again, the cynical confidence of the Sri Lankan Government that this will not be considered too heavy a price to pay by a Tamil for being permitted to function as a Minister may not be altogether misplaced.
Chief Minister and the Board of Ministers are 'to aid and advice' the Provincial Governor in the exercise of his functions What are the functions of this illustrious Chief Minister and this august body, the Board of Ministers? In the delightful phraseology of the 13th Amendment, the functions of the Chief Minister and the Board of Ministers are 'to aid and advice' the Provincial Governor in the exercise of his functions. We already know the nature of the functions of the Governor, namely to exercise executive power in relation to provincial matters. But, it would seem that the Provincial Governor appointed by a Sinhala President will need 'aid and advice', so that the Governor may perform his functions - not merely 'advice' but 'aid' as well.
The Governor will seek 'aid and advice' so that he may govern the Tamil people more effectively. In days gone by, the ruler of a people appointed Ministers to 'aid and advise' him. But today we live in a 'democracy'. And so, we have an executive President, who will appoint a Provincial Governor, who will be aided and advised by Ministers, who will be elected by the people.
Those who are required to 'aid and advice' the ruler should not be left in doubt about their duties But let us continue with our efforts to examine the 13th Amendment seriously. The 13th Amendment not only states that the function of the Ministers shall be to 'aid and advice' but it also specifies some of the ways in which such function shall be carried out. Those who are required to 'aid and advice' the ruler should not be left in doubt about their duties. For instance, it shall be the duty of the Chief Minister to communicate to the Governor all decisions of the Board of Ministers. The Chief Minister is not given a discretion in the matter. After all it is only if every decision of the Board of Ministers is communicated to the Governor, that the Governor will be suitably 'aided' and 'advised'.
Further, so that the Governor may be properly 'aided and advised' it shall also be the duty of the Ministers to furnish such information as the Governor may call for from time to time. And who will allocate business amongst the different Ministers? Although the Chief Minister is given the signal and ceremonial honour of selecting the Ministers it is the Governor who is empowered to make rules for the allocation of business among the Ministers. Again, the Governor himself may address the Provincial Council and may for that purpose require the attendance of members - including the Ministers. President may dissolve the Provincial Council Further, where any Provincial Council fails to comply with or give effect to any directions given to it, it shall be lawful for the President to hold that a situation has arisen in which the administration of the Province cannot be carried on in accordance with the Constitution. The President can thereupon, declare that the powers of the Provincial Council shall be exercisable by the Central Parliament and that the powers of the Ministers shall be assumed by the President.
But, let us continue with our efforts to understand the true character of this priceless boon that has been given to the Tamil people - a Board of Ministers with a Chief Minister. Governor not bound to act on the advice of the Chief Minister We have seen that the Ministers are required by law to 'aid and advise' the Governor - but what does the law require the Governor to do with the aid that is offered and the advice that is tendered? Is the Governor bound to act on the advice tendered to him by the Ministers? What does the 13th Amendment say on this important question? The 13th Amendment provides us with yet another curiously worded provision: "The Governor shall in the exercise of his functions act in accordance with such advice, except in so far as he is by or under the Constitution required to exercise his functions in his discretion."
Let us ask: what is this exception about? What are the matters in respect of which not only 'by' the Constitution, but also 'under' the Constitution the Governor is required to exercise his functions 'in his discretion' and therefore, not on the advice of the Chief Minister? We have seen that under the Constitution executive power in relation to the entirety of the Island is vested in the President and that in 'accordance with' this provision, executive power in respect of provincial matters will be exercised by a Governor holding office 'during the pleasure' of the President. The Ministers on the other hand, are not appointed by the President and do not hold office during his pleasure and accordingly the Constitution cannot and does not clothe the Provincial Minister with executive power. Executive power at all times remains vested in the President and may be exercised only by his loyal and faithful servants. The result is that the exercise of executive power in respect of provincial matters is a matter in the discretion of the Governor, in his capacity as a servant of the President: and in relation to this basic and substantial function, the Ministers may 'advise' but the Governor is not obliged to act on such advice. Executive power the Governor is subject to the direction and control of the President On the contrary, in respect of the exercise of executive power the Governor is subject to the direction and control of the President - because he holds office 'during the pleasure of the President', 'in accordance with Article 4(b)' which vests executive power in the President. The only matters in respect of which the 13th Amendment requires the Governor to act on the advice tendered by the Chief Minister are in respect of formal and ceremonial matters such as the appointment of the Ministers, the summoning of Provincial Council meetings, proroguing the Provincial Council and the dissolution of the Provincial Council - matters which do not affect the substance of the executive power vested in the President by article 4(b) of the Constitution. But what if a question arises as to whether any matter is or is not a matter in respect of which the Governor is required to act on the advice of the Chief Minister? Who will decide that question? The 13th Amendment declares quite openly and cheerfully that if such a question arises the question shall be decided by the Governor! Further, the decision of the Governor on such a question 'shall be final' and that the 'validity of anything done by the Governor shall not be called in question in any Court'. The 13th Amendment further takes care to expressly enact that the exercise of the Governor's discretion in this matter 'shall be on the President's direction'. And as if this was not enough to put the Governor's powers beyond scrutiny, it provides that 'the question whether any, and if so what advice was tendered by the Ministers to the Governor shall not be inquired into in any Court'.
Now, let us ask the further question: how will work in the Province be financed? After all, executive power in respect of provincial matters, cannot be exercised without expending money. What does the 13th Amendment say on this important question of finance? Who will control the purse? Here, the 13th Amendment enacts that there shall be a Finance Commission consisting of the Governor of Central Bank, the Secretary to the Treasury, one member to represent each of the three major communities. It would seem that communal representation is acceptable, so long as a Sinhala dominated Central Government selects the representatives. But, let us pass on, and inquire: what are the duties of this body of notables - the Finance Commission? The Finance Commission shall recommend to the Central Government the amount of the funds that should be allocated from the Annual Budget for the purposes of meeting the needs of all the Provinces. The Central Government shall then determine this total amount required for all the Provinces after consulting with the Finance Commission. Who will decide on the amount of money to be allocated to a particular province? Here it will be the duty of the Finance Commission to make recommendations to the President as to the principles on which such funds should be apportioned between the various Provinces. The President shall cause every recommendation made by the Finance Commission to be laid before the Parliament and shall notify Parliament as to the action taken . But in the end it is the President who will determine the amount of the grant to made to a particular province.
Further, the grants made by the Central Government will go into a Provincial Fund for each Province into which shall also be paid all taxes imposed by the Provincial Council and all loans advanced to the Provincial Council from the Consolidated Fund. No moneys may be withdrawn from the Provincial Fund except with the sanction of the Governor But, in respect of moneys that may be collected from within the Province, the Provincial Councils Act states that a Provincial Council may not pass any statute imposing abolishing or altering provincial taxes, or authorising the receipt of money on account of the Provincial Fund except on the recommendation of Governor. As always, the intention is clear. The amount of moneys that will be made available for expenditure for provincial matters shall be determined by the President, in so far as Central Government grants are concerned and by the Governor, in so far as provincial taxes and levies are concerned. But that is not all. The custody of the Provincial Fund, the payment of moneys into the Fund and all other connected matters shall be regulated by rules made by the Provincial Governor, the loyal and faithful servant of the President.
Section 19(3) of the Provincial Councils Act enacts that no sum shall be withdrawn from the Provincial Fund except under a warrant under the hand of the Chief Minister. But, immediately thereafter, section 19(4) enacts that no such warrant shall be issued by the Chief Minister unless the sum has, by statute of the Provincial Council, been granted for services for the financial year in question or has been otherwise lawfully charged on the Fund. And, then, Section 24(1) enacts that statutes which make provision for the appropriation of moneys out of the Provincial Fund or which declare that any expenditure may be charged on the Provincial Fund, shall not be introduced into or moved in a Provincial Council, except on the recommendation of the Governor!
If Ministers do not agree with the Governor, President may take over What will happen, if the Chief Minister or the Provincial Council do not act in accordance with the 'wishes' of the Governor and pass the recommended statutes and issue the requisite warrants in respect of the Fund? In such a deadlocked situation, the 13th Amendment enables the President if he is satisfied that a situation has arisen in which the administration of the Province cannot be carried out, to himself assume all the functions of the Governor, the Chief Minister and the Ministers and declare that the powers of the Provincial Council shall be vested in the Central Parliament. And the President's action shall not be called in question in any Court.
In sum elected Ministers without Ministerial power
Under the Sri Lanka Constitution executive power will continue to be vested in the President and in respect of provincial matters it will be exercised by his loyal servant the Provincial Governor who is authorised to act through either 'officers subordinate to him' or through Ministers, who, in relation to the exercise of such executive power, are also his subordinates. And it is the Governor who will have financial control. It is the Governor who will be in control of the provincial public service. The 13th Amendment may, take credit for inventing a new constitutional species - Ministers without ministerial power. And an appointed Governor with ministerial powers The truth, ofcourse, is that it is the Provincial Governor who is clothed with ministerial power in respect of provincial matters - the so called Provincial Governor is in fact, the Provincial 'Minister' - a Provincial 'Minister' appointed by the President and responsible to the President - a Provincial 'Minister' who combines in himself the role of both a Provincial 'Finance Minister' and a Provincial 'Minister of Public Administration'. The Provincial 'Minister' alias Governor will exercise executive power in respect of all the matters in respect of which a Provincial Council may pass statutes.3 And in respect of all other matters, executive power will be exercised by the President directly or through other Ministers appointed from the central legislature.
Many subjects outside even the Governor's powers
The Provincial 'Minister' alias Governor will exercise executive power in respect of the matters on which a Provincial Council may pass statutes. In respect of other matters, executive power will be exercised directly by the President or by Ministers of the Central Government. It is in respect of the matters on which a Provincial Council may pass statutes, that the Chief Minister and the Board of Ministers have been granted the signal honour and privilege of tendering aid or advice to the Governor. In respect of matters on which the Provincial Council is not empowered to pass statutes, the Chief Minister and his Board do not have that honour and privilege - because such matters are outside even the competence of the Governor and fall within the direct purview of the President and the Ministers of the Central Government. Let us ask: what are these matters in respect of which the Tamil have not been granted even the honour and privilege of advising their rulers? Here it would seem that the 13th Amendment is intended to secure the exemplary principle that even in the matter of seeking 'aid and advice' a ruler should act with circumspection and care - after all it will not do for a ruler to seek 'aid and advice' from his subjects on all matters. Including police and public order The Kings of old recognized that the subject of 'police and public order' was a sensitive area in respect of which a ruler should not depend too much on the 'aid and advice' of the people whom he seeks to rule. At the same time, it was important that the people who are ruled do not see the iron hand too clearly - the velvet glove is not without its uses. And so the 13th Amendment continues with its comic opera - and adopts its familiar technique of appearing to give with one hand whilst taking away with the other. On the one hand the Provincial Council List includes the subject of 'Police and Public Order'. On the other hand, it qualifies this subject by saying 'public order and the exercise of police powers' to the extent set out in the Appendix (13th Amendment 9th Schedule) And what does Appendix I enact? It enacts that the Inspector General Police shall be the head of the Sri Lanka Police Force which shall be divided into the National Division and a Provincial Division for each Province. The Provincial Division shall be headed by a Deputy Inspector General of Police seconded from the National Service. And who will select and appoint the D.I.G.? The I.G.P. shall appoint a D.I.G. for each Province with the 'concurrence of the Chief Minister of the Province', but if there is no agreement, the President after due consultation with the Chief Minister, will make the appointment. The Chief Minister is granted the privilege of being consulted! Who will recruit to the Provincial Police Division? Recruitment shall be made by a Provincial Police Commission composed of three members viz the D.I.G., a person nominated by the Central Public Service Commission in consultation with the President and a 'nominee of the Chief Minister'. And the Central Government will be responsible for the training of all recruits. Neither the Chief Minister nor for that matter the Governor shall be responsible for the preservation of public order within the Province. This will be the responsibility of the Provincial Police Division. But here too, the prevention, detection and investigation of any offence against any public officer and any offence prejudicial to National Security or the maintenance of Essential Services, shall be outside the competence of even the Provincial Police Division. (13th Amendment, Schedule to Appendix I ) Such offences though committed within the Province, will fall within the jurisdiction of the National Police Division. And, in this way, the Prevention of Terrorism Act whose provisions have been condemned by the International Commission of Jurists as 'a blot on the statute book' of any civilised country, will continue to be enforced within the Province by the National Police Division under the direct control of the I.G.P.. But let us pass on and continue with our efforts to examine the 13th Amendment seriously. Police and public order in the Province effectively retained in the hands of the President The 13th Amendment provides that whilst the D.I.G. himself 'shall be responsible to and under the control of the Chief Minister', all Police Officers in the Province shall function under the direction and control of the D.I.G. of such Province
The D.I.G. 'shall be responsible to and under the control of the Chief Minister' but the D.I.G. will be under the disciplinary control of the I.G.P. and will be employed on terms and conditions determined by the Central Government. The D.I.G. 'shall be responsible to and under the control of the Chief Minister' but the D.I.G. will be the faithful and loyal servant of the I.G.P. and the President of Sri Lanka. The D.I.G. 'shall be responsible to and under the control of the Chief Minister' but the 13th Amendment provides no means by which the Chief Minister may exercise any control in respect of the actions of the D.I.G. - except by appealing to the I.G.P. or the President for assistance. Executive power lies with the President and his servants - and to the extent that a Chief Minister is not a servant of the President, the Constitution does not and indeed, cannot, vest executive power in the Chief Minister.
The subject of 'Police and Public Order' is not even within the competence of the Provincial Governor. It is a subject which is effectively retained in the hands of the President and the I.G.P. who may act either through the National Police Division or the Provincial Police division. And Dr. H.W. Jayawardene, appearing on behalf of his brother, President J.R. Jayawardene before the Constitutional Court in October 1987 declared openly: "All police officers will be appointed by the Inspector General of Police who is directly under the control of the President." (Sri Lanka Sun: 30th October 1987) Disposition of State land in the hands of the Sinhala President Apart from the subject of 'police and public order', there was another which was close to the hearts of the Kings of old - and that was 'disposition of state land'. It was not only a way of making friends and influencing people - it was also a way of bringing about demographic change and managing a people. During the past several decades, successive Sinhala Governments have used their control of state land to further their efforts to secure hegemony over the entirety of the Island. It was a process which gathered momentum in 1936 with the efforts of a pan Sinhala Cabinet of Ministers to initiate state sponsored Sinhala colonisation of the Eastern Province. The Census figures tell their own tale.
On the one hand, the subject of 'Land and Land Settlement' is matter in the Provincial Councils List. On the other hand this is qualified by the statement: 'Land and Land Settlement' to the extent set out in Appendix II. (13th Amendment 9th Schedule) And what does Appendix II enact? It enacts that 'state land shall continue to vest in the Republic and may be disposed of in accordance with Article 33(d) and written law governing the matter'. What is Article 33(d) of the Constitution? This is the article which enacts that the 'President shall have the power to execute such grants and dispositions of lands and immovable property vested in the Republic'! So despite 'Land and Land Settlement' being a matter in the Provincial List, disposition of state land remains a power vested in the President and the Central Government. Dr. H.W. Jayawardene, who appeared on behalf of the President Jayawardene before the Constitutional Court in Sri Lanka in October 1987 was as always, open and frank:
In matters connected with the disposition of state land, just as much as in matters connected with police and public order, it is the President who will rule. The third of the constitutional trinity of marvels - the Provincial Council
The 13th Amendment grandiloquently declares in Article 154G that every Provincial Council may make statutes applicable to the Province with respect to the matters set out in a list referred to as 'the Provincial Council List'. In addition there is a Concurrent List which sets out matters in respect of which both Parliament and the Provincial Councils may legislate. Finally, a Reserved List sets out matters in respect of which only Parliament may legislate and in respect of which a Provincial Council shall have no power to make statutes. (13th Amendment 9th Schedule) At first sight, these provisions may give the impression that the 13th Amendment confers legislative power on the Provincial Councils in respect of certain specified matters, on Parliament in respect of certain other matters and concurrent on both the Provincial Council and Parliament on certain other matters and may even be regarded as 'federal' in nature. But Professor Claire Palley, puts the matter clearly:
The constitutional reality is that Article 154G(10) of the 13th Amendment enacts:
Again, the first subject on the Reserved List (i.e. matters within the exclusive jurisdiction of the central Parliament) is 'National Policy on all Subjects and Functions'.These Constitutional provisions taken together will enable Parliament to legislate by a simple majority on 'all subjects and functions' on the ground of 'national policy'. 'National policy' is a sufficiently broad cover to enable the central Parliament to legislate in respect of any matter 'National policy' is a sufficiently broad cover to enable the central Parliament to legislate in respect of any matter on the Provincial Council List. The law making powers of Provincial Councils do not include 'national policy'. It was this which impelled Counsel who appeared for the ruling United National Party to forthrightly declare before the Constitutional Court in Sri Lanka:
Again, it is not only that Parliament may pass laws by a simple majority, in respect of national policy on all subjects and functions but also that Parliament may by a simple majority make laws in respect of any matter set out in the Provincial Council List if such law is necessary for implementing any treaty, agreement or even any decision 'made at an international conference, association or other body'. Finally, to cap it all, in a country which since 1965, has been governed under emergency regulations by successive Sri Lanka governments for a period of more than 15 years, the 13th Amendment enacts that emergency regulations under the Public Security Ordinance, may override, amend or suspend any statute made by a Provincial Council.
Again the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka has ruled that the Provincial Councils are 'subordinate' law making bodies subject to the dominant will of the Central government and for that reason the 13th Amendment did not require the support of the people at a referendum. The words of the 13th Amendment are plain. By virtue of its power to legislate in respect of national policy on all subjects and functions, the Sri Lankan Parliament is effectively empowered to legislate in respect of all the three Lists in the 9th Schedule to the 13th Amendment. The 'subordinate' legislative powers conferred on a Provincial Council in respect of the matters set out in the Provincial Councils List will be at all times subject to the dominant will of the Central Government. Further, even the 'subordinate' legislative power conferred on a Provincial Council covers a narrow and limited range of subjects and effectively excludes disposition of state land, maintenance of public order and higher education. And significantly, whilst plan implementation is a subject on the Provincial Council List, planning and formulation of plan implementation strategies is not on the List.
And, even in relation to those subjects in respect of which a Provincial Council may exercise 'subordinate' legislative power subject to the overriding will of Parliament, a Provincial Council may not pass statutes if involving a financial levy except on the recommendation of the Governor. And in keeping with the powers conferred on the Governor to control the Provincial Finance Fund, it is the Governor who shall in respect of every financial year prepare and present to the Provincial Council a budget of the estimated receipts and expenditure for that year. And so much of the Governor's estimates as relates to expenditure 'charged upon the Provincial Fund' shall not be even submitted to the vote of the Provincial Council! And what are these items of expenditure on which the Council may not vote? They include the emoluments of the Governor, charges payable in respect of loans advanced by the Central Government, and 'any other expenditure declared by the Constitution or by law made by Parliament' to be so charged! And what are the powers of the Provincial Council in respect of estimates of other expenditure i.e. expenditure not regarded as 'charged on the Provincial Fund'? Such estimates shall be presented by the Governor in the form of demands for grants to the Provincial Council and the Provincial Council may assent, refuse to assent, or reduce the amount of the grant. The Provincial Council shall not have power to increase the amount of the grant demanded! Finally, no demand for a grant shall be made except on the recommendation of the Governor. Furthermore, if the President is satisfied that the financial stability of any part of Sri Lanka is threatened, he may make a declaration to that effect. And during the period of such Proclamation, the President may give directions to the Governor of a Province to 'observe such canons of financial propriety as may be specified in the directions' and give 'such other directions as the President may deem necessary.' And, notwithstanding anything in the Constitution, any such direction may include a provision requiring the reduction of salaries of all or any class of persons serving in the Province and a provision requiring all statutes providing for payment into or out of the Provincial Fund to be reserved for the consideration of the President.
The powers of the Provincial Councils may be changed by a simple majority Again, it would appear that the architects of 13th Amendment recognized that it would be unwise to restrict their freedom of action in the years to come. Though the Sri Lankan Constitution has been amended 12 times during the past 8 years, it was perhaps felt that the ruling Sinhala political party may not be able to secure the requisite two thirds majority to amend the Constitution in the years to come - after all it may not be possible for the ruling party to continue to postpone general elections and retain its two thirds majority in Parliament by securing a simple majority of votes cast by the Sinhala electorate at a referendum. It may have been felt that it was important that the Sinhala rulers should have a free hand to provide for a changing future - a future which has now arrived with the election of the new Sri Lankan Parliament in February 1989, where President Premadasa's United National Party no longer commands a two thirds majority. It was not without reason that the 13th Amendment enacted that Parliament may by a simple majority pass and amend laws to provide for the election of members of Provincial Councils, the qualifications for membership of such Councils, the procedure for transaction of business by a Provincial council, the salaries and allowances of members of a Provincial Council, and 'any other matter necessary for the purpose of giving effect to the principles' of the 13th Amendment and for 'any matters connected with or incidental to' the 13th Amendment! In this way, Parliament may give effect to the so called ' principles' of the 13th Amendment without being troubled with securing the two thirds majority required for an amendment to the Constitution. It was in the exercise of these powers that Parliament passed the Provincial Councils Act - an Act which may itself be amended from time to time by a simple majority. Further, other laws may be passed by the Central Parliament, by a simple majority in respect of matters 'connected with or incidental to' those set out in the 13th Amendment. And that which the Sri Lankan Supreme Court may rule as being 'connected with or incidental' to the 13th Amendment may raise interesting questions related to political expediency rather than law.
13th Amendment: Constitutional sleight of hand
There are some who may describe the 13th Amendment as a constitutional sleight of hand par excellence. But, that is to put too fine a point on the matter. The blunt reality is that those who proclaim that the 13th Amendment is intended to share power between the Tamil people and the Sinhala people, are, to use a colloquialism, 'trying to pull a fast one' on the Tamil people. Under the 13th Amendment power will continue to reside in a Sinhala dominated Central government, within the frame of an unitary constitution. The 13th Amendment is intended to secure a constitutional frame which will enable a Sinhala majority to manage the Tamil people more effectively than before. It has created Provincial Ministers who will not exercise executive power but who will have executive power exercised 'through' them!. At the same time it has created a Provincial Governor who is in truth a Provincial 'Minister' who will exercise executive power in respect of provincial matters - a Provincial Governor who is also the administrative head of the provincial public service and who has control of the Provincial Finance Fund. And the 13th Amendment has created a Provincial Council without control of planning, without control of the provincial budget, without control of police and public order within the province, without control of disposition of state land within the province, without control of higher education and whose remaining meagre legislative powers are subject to the over riding will of the Central Parliament. Finally, the provisions of the Provincial Councils Act itself may be amended from time to time by a simple majority of members present and voting in Parliament!
Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi declared at a public meeting in Tamil Nadu on the 5th of August 1988 that 'it was unfortunate that the Tamils of Sri Lanka had not yet got the benefits of devolution of power because of LTTE intransigence. Other provinces in that country now enjoyed greater financial and police powers for dealing with law and order situations, thanks to the Indo Sri Lanka Accord signed last year. But the Northern and Eastern Provinces were not.' He went on:
13th Amendment fails to address central issues of the Tamil national struggle But the constitutional reality of the 13th Amendment is that the so called 'democratic electoral process' in which the Tamil people have been invited to participate refuses to address itself to the central issues of the Tamil national liberation struggle.
On the contrary, the 13th Amendment will require members of the Provincial Council to take their oaths under the 6th Amendment and acquiesce in and sanction such violation.
Denies homeland to the Tamils of Eelam Nowhere is the refusal to recognize the existence of the Tamils of Eelam as a people with a homeland reflected more clearly than in the provisions of the Provincial Councils Act in respect of the merger of the Northern and Eastern Province. The Indo Sri Lanka Accord signed by Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of India and President J.R. Jayawardene of Sri Lanka, on the 29th of July 1987, acknowledged that the Northern and Eastern Province 'have been areas of historical habitation' of the Tamils in the island of Sri Lanka. (Preamble to Indo Sri Lanka Accord, July 1987) It was an acknowledgment which was watered down by the additional statement that the Tamils 'have at all times hitherto lived together in this territory with other ethnic groups'. Be that as it may, the Indo Sri Lanka Accord was right to recognize that the togetherness of the Tamil people had grown, hand in hand, with the growth of their homelands in the North and East of Sri Lanka, where they lived together, worked together, communicated with each other, founded their families, educated their children, and also sought refuge, from time to time, from physical attacks elsewhere in Sri Lanka. The Accord was right to recognize that without an identifiable homeland the Tamils in Sri Lanka would not have become a people with a separate culture and a separate language and that without an identified homeland they will cease to exist as a people in the future. And in the words of Malcolm Shaw in Title to Territory in Africa:
After all, it was this which was partially recognized both by the 1972 Constitution and by the 1978 Constitution when these Constitutions made provision for the use of the Tamil language in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. It was this which was recognized by Professor Virginia Leary in her Report on the Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lanka in 1981 when she declared that the Tamils could be considered to a people with a distinct language, culture and to an extent, a defined territory. (Professor Virginia Leary, ICJ Report, 1981 at page 69) Therefore the signatories to the Indo Sri Lanka Accord were right in taking the view that there was no need to hold a referendum before declaring that the Northern and Eastern Provinces 'have been areas of historical habitation' of the Tamil people. And resorts to the subterfuge of a referendum But though the Accord recognized the Northern and Eastern Provinces as areas of historic habitation of the Tamil people, the 13th Amendment and the Provincial Councils Act refused to translate that recognition into constitutional reality.
The Provincial Councils Act provided that the President may by Proclamation merge the Northern and Eastern Provinces if he is satisfied that all arms and ammunition held by the militant groups have been surrendered and there has been a cessation of acts of violence. The Act then went on to provide for a referendum to be held in the Eastern Province to determine whether the people of the Eastern Province want the Eastern Province to be continued to be linked with the Northern Province. If the people of the Eastern Province vote against a linkage, then the merger will be terminated. But if the people of the Eastern Province vote for a linkage with the Northern Province, a poll shall not be required to determine the wishes of the people in the Northern Province. The Provincial Councils Act rightly assumes that the Tamil people living in the Northern Province want a merger of the Northern and Eastern Province and that a poll would be superfluous. But it refuses to accept that the Tamils living in the Eastern Province are also a part of the same Tamil people. A Machievellian provision intended to secure that the merger is temporary The reason for this Machiavellian provision is not too far to seek. A few days before the signing of the Accord, President Jayawardene stated to the National Executive Committee of the ruling United National Party:
The enthusiastic recognition of the Northern and Eastern Province as the areas of 'historical habitation' of the Tamils was apparently a 'temporary' enthusiasm confined to the preamble of the Accord. The merger of the Northern and Eastern Province was a temporary merger intended to serve an immediate purpose and get over a pressing immediate difficulty - namely the need to 'see the end' of that which President Jayawardene chose to describe as the 'terrorist movement' in his address to his Executive Committee, and that which he himself had acknowledged as the 'militant' movement in the Indo Sri Lanka Accord which he signed on the 29th of July 1987.
As President Jayawardene was careful to point out to the Executive Committee of the ruling Party, included in the Eastern Province was the Amparai District. That which he did not state and that which his listeners were well aware was that during the past fifty years, state sponsored colonisation had contributed to considerable increases in the Sinhala population in the Amparai District. On the one hand the Sri Lankan government sought to use the vote of recently settled Sinhala colonists to prevent the merger and this led to the concerted efforts of the Sri Lankan Government to bring in more Sinhala settlers into the Eastern Province in the immediate aftermath of the Accord. On the other hand the Sri Lankan government sought to campaign on the basis of dividing the Tamil people into Jaffna Tamils and Batticaloa Tamils, and into Muslim Tamils and non Muslim Tamils. And, finally, the Sri Lankan Government ensured that the Provincial Councils Act may itself be amended by the Central Parliament by a simple majority and in this way the result of a referendum in favour of a merger, may in any event, may be nullified at a suitable and convenient time - after the surrender of arms.
But beneath the cosmetics, the underlying political reality of the 13th Amendment was that it refused to recognize the Tamils of Eelam as a people - and it refused to recognize the existence of the Tamil homeland where the identity of the Tamil people had in fact grown.
Refuses to recognise the political reality of the Tamil Nation The 13th Amendment seeks to resolve the political conflict in Sri Lanka without facing up to the existential political reality that there exist in Sri Lanka today two nations - the Tamil nation and the Sinhala nation. To those who continue to ask what is a nation the time has come to declare with Rupert Emerson:
In the matter of fact words of Professor Seton-Watson:
Today, the 'idea' of the Tamil nation has become so embedded amongst the Tamils of Eelam, that it is no longer 'stoppable'. It is no longer stoppable because it is embedded in the direct personal feelings and the material interests of large sections of the Tamil people,
It was of such an idea that Sri Aurobindo wrote eloquently in 1907:
The Tamil Nation in Eelam is more than an idea
Tamil nationalism is all these - and more. It is all these together as an integrated whole - an integrated whole which is greater than the sum of its constituent parts - and an integrated whole which has taken shape through a process of opposition and differentiation during a period of more than two thousand years. Every inside has an outside. And it was continued Sinhala discrimination during a time period of several decades, which consolidated the growth of the Tamil nation. That which was treated separately, became separate. It is when one begins to understand all this that one will also understand the sacrifices and the suffering undergone by the Tamil people and the militant movement in the name of the Tamil nation - understand the answering response from thousands of Tamils and understand the increasing togetherness of the Tamil people. And it is when one understands all this that one will also understand the political reality of the Tamil nation and its power to direct and influence the conduct of thousands. Thimpu Declaration was the joint and unanimous will of the Tamil people However, the Tamil people are not chauvinists - they do not take an exaggerated view of nationalism. The Tamils of Eelam know that no nation is an island. They know that nations live together - the question is: on what terms? And the first step for determining the terms on which two nations may live together is for each nation to recognize the existence of the other. The 1985 Thimpu Declaration expressed the joint and unanimous will of the Tamil people and set out a reasoned framework within which the Tamil nation and the Sinhala nation may live in Sri Lanka:
The Tamil people recognized the existence of the Sinhala nation. The question they asked was whether the Sinhala people were ready and willing to recognize the existence of the Tamil nation. And in the end, nothing exemplifies the intellectual and moral dishonesty of Sinhala chauvinism more than its continued efforts to masquerade as a 'Sri Lankan nationalism' by denying the existence of not only the Tamil nation but also the Sinhala nation in Sri Lanka. Constitutional script for a comic opera The 13th Amendment pretends that the Tamil nation does not exist. It denies to the Tamil people the right to sit as equals with the Sinhala people and determine the political structure within which the two people may live in equality. But, the Tamil nation will not quietly go away and disappear from the political arena merely because the Indian government and the Sri Lankan government refuse to recognize its existence. The words of a brave young Tamil, Selvarajah Yogachandran, in a musty court house in Colombo when he was sentenced to death in 1982 continue to be relevant - 'You may take my life, but for the life of each Kuttimuni you take, there will be ten more who will be born'.
But Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi's government will secure stability in the Indian region only if it has the strength to openly recognize that both India and Sri Lanka are multi national states - and only if it uses that strength to put into place constitutional structures which reflect that political reality.
If the French revolutionaries were offered cake instead of bread, the Tamils of Eelam have been offered form without content. The right place for the truly comic Provincial Council and its Board of Ministers with its comic functions, created by the 13th Amendment, is an opera by Gilbert and Sullivan and not a Tamil Eelam seething with discontent and convulsed with conflict.
|