The APRC, Power Sharing and the 13th Amendment - 14th January 2008

The Peace Secretariat is surprised at the barrage of criticism directed recently at attempts to initiate a political solution to the country’s current problems through the All Party Representative Committee. This Committee has met nearly sixty times over the last eighteen months and has done yeoman service in attempting to achieve consensus amongst a range of political parties with very different ideas. It is a tribute to its Chairman, Prof Tissa Vitharna, and the participants, that they have agreed on many factors. Some others need to be settled, but all indications are that this will be done soon.

However, the APRC does not include all parties, and therefore implementation of its proposals may take some time. Both the UNP and the JVP have withdrawn from the APRC and, if any proposals require a two thirds majority of parliament, the support of at least one of these parties will be necessary. Whilst it is hoped that some support will be available, the lessons of history cannot be ignored. In both her first term and her second, President Kumaratunga thought she would get the support of the UNP for far-reaching constitutional reforms, but this was not forthcoming.

Whilst there may have been good reason for this, the action of several UNP members, in burning the proposals on the floor of the house on the grounds that they conceded too much to Tamils, speaks volumes for the breadth and quality of the opposition that may face any proposals put forward by the APRC. The opposition of the UNP even to President Kumaratunga’s P-Toms agreement, now forgotten by those who blame only the JVP – which resorted to a legal remedy rather than insidious insinuation – confirms that the government would be unwise to put all its eggs into the basket of possible UNP support for constitutional changes.

This does not mean the government should not try, to institute such reforms as seem desirable. But it should also activate contingency measures to improve the situation regardless of the fate of major reform proposals. This is what last week’s discussions were about, and it is sad that many commentators have sought to denigrate these efforts instead of looking at what is positive about them.

In short, the government plans to work in accordance with the simplest principles of problem solving, that any student of critical thinking has imbibed. Regrettably critical thinking was not taught before the nineties in Sri Lanka, so many commentators are not aware that, when you have a big problem, it makes sense to divide it into small problems and solve each of them as possible. Again, one needs to proceed from what one knows, arranged systematically, to deduce what one does not know; one proceeds from what is given, ordering it carefully, to derive whatever more seems desirable.

Hence the sensible suggestion that the 13th amendment, which is now law in this country, should be activated in full. This was not done, for a variety of reasons which should be analysed at length, though this is not the appropriate place to do this. Suffice it to say that, because of unwillingness on the part of many Provincial Councils to take initiatives, accompanied by the natural unwillingness of central government ministers to yield their prerogatives, very little that could have been accomplished for the benefit of the people of the provinces was achieved. At the same time the signal achievement of perhaps the only Provincial Council Chief Minister who had far-reaching plans he implemented systematically – namely Jayawickrema Perera of the Northwestern Province who created what might be termed the brand Wayamba – indicates what can be done with concerted effort.

There are several areas in which thorough implementation of the 13th amendment will suffice to empower people in areas in which they have previously been deprived. There are others in which appropriate regulations can be brought, under what is termed the concurrent list, with only a simple majority of parliament required for ratification, to increase regional powers and ensure that these will not be trespassed upon by the centre. Not only in areas such as Health and Education, where centralized decision making is obviously inappropriate, but even in fields such as Policing and Justice, the 13th amendment conferred powers that have not been implemented.

What is the problem about implementing these? The fear perhaps is that, after implementing these, the government will decide that nothing more need be done. That fear is understandable, given what happened in the past, but this is where the APRC would also have put further proposals on the table for consideration, proposals which it will not then be possible to ignore. The point is, if those further proposals cannot be implemented, immediately or even later, it is ridiculous to prevent some good being done on the grounds that better might just conceivably be possible.

Many years ago, there was a joke in circulation about a five story building in which women could shop for husbands. If they did not want someone from the first floor, they could go up to the second and so on, with the guarantee that what was on offer would get better. The only constraint was that they could not go back. So the first floor had loving husbands, the second rich and loving husbands, the third handsome and rich and loving husbands, the fourth sensitive and handsome and rich and loving husbands.

Naturally, the woman about whom the story is told went up to the fifth floor. There was a sign there that said that she was the three hundred and fifty thousandth seven hundred and ninety third woman to come to the fifth floor, which showed that a woman could never be satisfied. The TNA may not have a choice, as to whether or not they can accept a compromise. But it is to be hoped that not all commentators, national and international, are quite like the apocryphal woman of this story.

Prof Rajiva Wijesinha

Secretary General

Secretariat for Coordinating the Peace Process