By S. Saraswathi
A serious constitutional crisis unleashed in Sri Lanka, like any other neighbourhood problem involving constitutional crisis and political instability, will not leave India in peace. Already its repercussions are felt in our country and some political parties are loudly expressing their views. The course of events read like a drama with each scene opening a new development.
Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena, who in collaboration with Ranil Wickremesinghe, leader of the United National Party (UNP) ousted Mahinda Rajapaksa in 2015, has played the same game again. He now abruptly pulled out of Sri Lanka’s National Unity coalition government, sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe on 26th October and replaced him with former President Mahinda Rajapaksha. There was no majority test and no open split of parties reducing the strength of the ruling party.
Next day, he also suspended Parliament till November 16 which prevents it to react and got 14 ministers sworn in. Rapid action by the authors and supporters of this coup, such as updating the official portal of the government as reported in some press, suggests political action forecasting instability.
All these events happening in quick succession have undermined established parliamentary procedure and need equally fast action to convene Parliament and test the majority for installation of a valid government, if democratic principles, as we know, have to be restored. Suspension of Parliament for over a fortnight in the situation obtaining in Sri Lanka is unbecoming of a democracy and is open to criticism as officially granted time for switching sides and horse-trading, which has become common political practice everywhere.
At the time, Wickremesinghe-led United National Front (UNF) was the largest party with 106 members in the House of 225 members. The number gives him strength to challenge the President’s action and demand a floor test to ascertain parliamentary support of the two sides. The United People’s Freedom Alliance including supporters of Rajapaksa has 99 members.
Declaring that his UNF has the support of majority in Parliament, the sacked PM wants reconvening of Parliament to prove his majority. He seems to be confident of his strength to re-enact his victory through the No-Confidence Motion against his ministry, hardly six months ago. The constitutional validity of the change is certainly debatable, but fortunes change with changes in coalition partners.
Outbreak of street level politics in the island nation over these developments is inevitable. Loyalists of the two sides openly clashed, which ended in the death of one person. The Speaker of Parliament questioned the President’s decisions and for his part recognised the ousted Prime Minister as the leader of the government, who was the legally elected Prime Minister and had the mandate to form the government. He wants immediate resolution of the political conflict so as to avoid “bloodbath” on the streets. The strong words used by him have to be taken seriously by democratic societies, particularly nearby India, closest to Sri Lanka in many respects.
The Sri Lankan Constitution as amended in 2015 ruled out the possibility of the President removing the Prime Minister who can be removed only by Parliament. The US, UK, and the EU and most of the European countries individually are in favour of upholding the Constitution and the democratic process. On the other hand, China welcomes the change and has promptly conveyed its good wishes to the new PM Rajapaksa, thus reflecting a visible division in world opinion.
India preferred to wait before giving its views. It has to weigh the options and consider its long-term interests keeping in mind its relationship with other neighbours. Rajapaksa is known to be leaning towards China, which is assigned several big infrastructure projects in Sri Lanka. He has also given strategic entry to China into the island by leasing out Hambabdota Port to them, assigning the major project of building the Colombo port, and allowed them to dock its submarines in Sri Lanka — all of which directly reduce the sphere of Indian influence in the region to the extent it increases that of China.
While the Indian government prefers to wait and watch the situation as it unfolds, political parties in Tamil Nadu — the DMK, AIADMK, MDMK, PMK, VCK, and also the CPI and CPM are all voicing concern over the recent developments, anticipating further troubles to Tamils under this change. Their stand has been part of local Tamil politics and not necessarily in alignment with that of the national policy of the Centre.
Their grievances with the regime of Rajapaksa unite them to cry about the safety of Tamils there and of Indian fishermen fishing in the Indian Ocean. The coming together of Sirisena and Rajapaksa is viewed with apprehension by these parties, though for the common people of the State, Sri Lankan politics is not a crucial problem and cannot be made an electoral issue.
Sirisena’s realignment with Rajapaksa after parting in 2014 to become President is a bit of a surprise. The constitutional validity of the move to bring in Rajapaksa in place of Wickremesinghe is questioned by democratic nations. The relative popularity of the two contending PMs within their country and outside is not relevant when the nation has a written Constitution to follow.
Barely a week back, Ranil Wickremesinghe was in Delhi and discussed the progress of a number of pending development projects with his counterpart Modi, who expressed concern over the delay. The two Prime Ministers went through the whole gamut of bilateral relations between the two countries and explored the possibilities of furthering the relations. Progress on several decisions reached between the two neighbours in recent past and delay in carrying out the projects, particularly those agreed to in 2017 were reviewed. Differences between President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe, who were affiliated to different alliances when they joined in 2015, seemed to have hindered progress.
While India and particularly Tamil Nadu has some reasons to worry about Rajapaksa’s return to power, efforts are going on from the side of Sri Lanka to improve ties between the two countries through development projects.
New Delhi cannot be interfering with the internal politics of Sri Lanka and has to safeguard its long-term interests through bilateral relations. Its interests are larger than that of local political parties of Tamil Nadu and it has to maintain its principles and policies while safeguarding special interests of Tamils arising from close proximity and centuries of interrelationship. Bilateral connectivity, regional interests, and neighbourly good relations have to be at the centre and cannot be allowed to decline for any reason. Also, the question of devolution of powers to the Tamils, although an internal matter of Sri Lanka, has extended effect on India.
Thus, India has logically no reason to rejoice over the sudden political transition in Sri Lanka. But, international relations are based on logic plus factors. Plus factors oblige the country to learn to live with given situations where it has no say.—INFA
(The writer is former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)