Today IN YOUR OPINION, Anusha David interviews an eclectic group who debate the balance of power at the forthcoming general election. Which outcome better serves the nation’s interests: a super-majority which could expedite crucial laws and reforms but risks giving absolute power to the government, as with the UPFA in 2010? Or a simple majority which would ensure debate and prevent presidential overreach but risk stalemating parliament?

Which approach: swift action through an absolute majority or shared decision-making through a strong opposition?

Geoffrey Alagaratnam - President's Counsel, Past President of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka

Past experience demonstrates that the UPFA in 2010 and UNP from 1978 as a result of supermajority governments, spawned authoritarianism, thus eroding democracy. The Southern insurrection and the thirty-year civil war endured such governments, even notwithstanding a POWERFUL EXECUTIVE PRESIDENCY [ EP ].
Power corrupts, Absolute Power– Absolutely!
Signifiant Democratic Legislation, 17th  Amendment to the constitution birthing the Constitutional Council to check against unbridled power of EP and the 19th Amendment clipping wings and reducing term of EP were consensual across the political divide in coalition governments.
Not a super majority but a government with more than a wafer-thin majority is desirable. A comfortable majority will overcome green-eyed grass-hopping politicians flicking around.
Such a government compels our “LETHAGIC” citizenry to engage and pressure the government and opposition to harmoniously deliver on legislation for the good of the country and its future. Foremost would be abolishing the EP and the repealing of obnoxious laws such as the PTA.

Dr. Kaushalya Ariyarathne - National Executive Committee Member of NPP, Colombo District Candidate
 
In the last presidential election, the people of Sri Lanka entrusted Anura Kumara Dissanayake and the National People's Power (NPP) with a mandate to address the complex economic, social, and political challenges exacerbated by previous governments. Citizens have endured years of mismanagement and corruption, leading to a significant erosion of trust in politicians and past governments. A new NPP government, committed to transparency and accountability, can restore faith among the people and promote a more inclusive and democratic process. Sri Lankan people have expressed a clear desire for change, rallying behind the NPP's calls for justice and reform.

Many who are now planning to join the opposition have already been rejected by the electorate. Therefore, the forthcoming parliament will face challenges, particularly as the opposition includes individuals lacking integrity. How can citizens rely on individuals who have already been rejected by the electorate to contribute to effective policymaking for the country? The very fact that these figures have lost public trust raises serious questions about their ability to drive meaningful change, even as the opposition. Many individuals now seeking to return to parliament have a history of opposing progressive legislation and striking deals that harm the public. They are now attempting to regain legitimacy for themselves and their actions. How can we build a better parliament in the face of these individuals, whose past actions undermine trust and progress? Over the past years, the NPP has actively mobilized citizens and empowered them to make informed decisions, reinforcing the importance of democratic participation. Therefore, we believe that the people of Sri Lanka will make the right choice to compose a better parliament.
 

Pesala M Karunaratna - Brand Strategist 

The current ruling party, the NPP, lacks the necessary experience in several critical areas of governance, including diplomatic relations with foreign governments and institutions, understanding the global economy, and implementing the economic reforms needed to foster growth. Furthermore, many of the candidates they present for elections lack the depth of exposure and insight required to address the nation’s complex challenges. Granting a two-thirds parliamentary majority to such an inexperienced team could lead to serious instability. To ensure balanced governance and stability, a strong opposition with experienced lawmakers is essential. This would enable constructive feedback and critical insights to guide an inexperienced government toward effective and stable decision-making.
 

Dr. Amal Randhir Karunaratna – PhD, former Associate Professor [Adj] , School of Business University of Adelaide, CEO Breakthrough Business Intelligence

Swift action with a super majority or shared decision-making with a strong opposition?
So far, AKD’s team have shown a level of restraint and somewhat clumsily tried to do what they said they would.  Does this mean they can be trusted with the keys to the kingdom? For those of us who remember the 70’s 80’s and 90’s and the recent past, the JVP have been violent, disruptive and obstructive. To suddenly ask a voter to believe that the alcoholic has suddenly found religion is a big stretch. A more cautious approach would be to see what happens when the real decision-making happens. While AKD acknowledges that while they lack experience, the team have strong policies and can call in expertise, the centrepiece of which is the elimination of corruption. The stakes are high. Given that a single dominant opposition in the new parliament is unlikely, a Malimawa would need to cut deals with several splinter parties and lots of independents without a supermajority. Yes, it may slow things down, but radical change, need not be fast. Fast could be reckless, combined with inexperience. A more nuanced process may be less painful for an electorate that has pain fatigue. Remember Gota?
 

Jayomi Lokuliyana - Founder / CEO, zMessenger Pvt Ltd, Founder Adstudio. Cloud Independent Board Director CDB PLC

The election of a president from the NPP heralds a profound transformation in our political framework. The NPP's governance philosophy contrasts significantly with the entrenched paradigms maintained over the last 76 years, representing a competition between two distinct schools of thought. For the NPP to realize its ambitious reform agenda, it is imperative that they wield considerable authority. A lack of sufficient power may result in a legislative stalemate, where legacy political entities strive to preserve their status quo, seriously undermining potential economic advancements. As we continue to navigate our current economic challenges, any discord between the executive and legislative branches could prove detrimental, exacerbating the crisis. The NPP must therefore consolidate their mandate to ensure coherent policy implementation and foster a conducive environment for economic recovery. Compromise and collaborative governance will be essential to mitigate any threats to stability and progress during this critical period.

Rohan Pethiyagoda - Scientist, author and biodiversity scientist who has served almost half his career in senior government positions. He is a strident advocate for good governance.
 
A simple majority doesn’t “risk stalemating parliament”, and if it does, the government could always seek a stronger mandate by calling a general election or even a referendum. Super majorities, however, are needed only to change the constitution. If a single party elects to change the constitution, as we saw in 1972, 1978 and 2010, then the change is designed not to benefit the people but to benefit that party. Any constitutional change that is meaningful must have broad consensus, and especially the consent of the religious and ethnic minorities. Democracy doesn’t mean dictatorship by the majority. The core idea of democracy is that the authority of the government derives from the consent of the governed.

That said, given historical precedent, I think it is likely that the NPP will win a two-thirds majority on 14 November. That will be bad not only for Sri Lanka but also for the NPP. You know what they say about absolute power: it corrupts absolutely. So, this is my advice to anyone who asks me how to vote: vote for any credible party and candidates you like, other than the NPP. I say this for the NPP’s own good.
 

Thilan Wijesinghe - Chairman & Managing Director TWCorp Pvt Ltd

What matters most is not whether a party has a simple or super majority – in the past coalition governments with a majority of just one have governed more competently than governments with a supermajority. Also, it is not the experience (equated with age), knowledge or education of a parliamentarian that matters, but competence and integrity. During brief periods the economy was managed competently, what mattered was not the size of the majority in parliament, but a few factors. (a) Whether the political leadership appointed competent bureaucrats; e.g. Mr A. S. Jayawardena as Secretary to the Treasury from 1994 - 97) and invited capable private sector professionals as advisers; e.g. Mr N. G. P. Panditeratne and Mr Rajan Asirwatham, both precedent partners of KPMG, who advised Presidents Jayewardene and Kumaratuge respectively. (b) Whether capable public and private sector professionals are appointed to head important state institutions, and not friends and family of the political leadership. (c) Whether the political leadership relied on individuals including themselves to run the country at the expense of building strong institutions such as the Finance Ministry’s National Planning Department. The country needs a parliament, supermajority or not, that builds institutions and not political dynasties or egos.

Eran Wickramaratne - Former Member of Parliament of Sri Lanka and Economist
 
There is no guarantee that the swift action you expect from a supermajority will be beneficial to the nation. Most often, that swift action is detrimental, as we witnessed in 2010 and 2020. This is because swiftness is achieved by bypassing debate or consultation, which are essential for good outcomes. An overarching principle for me is that democracy is not just a governmental system, but a way of life; so I would say this, even if we had won the presidency. Furthermore, parties with a Marxist, revolutionary history have tended to favour one-party systems, which lead to totalitarian regimes with far-reaching negative implications. That's all the more reason to not grant this government a supermajority. In fact, any government that seeks a supermajority has sinister intentions, because a simple majority is sufficient to pass most laws in parliament. A two-thirds majority is only required for major legislation such as constitutional amendments. If those amendments are beneficial to the nation and promote democracy, no people-friendly opposition will defeat them. We, as the SJB, certainly will be a people-friendly opposition if the people decide we should be the opposition.

Ranel T. Wijesinha - Chartered Accountant, Past President of CA Sri Lanka and former Chairman Securities & Exchange Commission of Sri Lanka.
 
The first Parliamentary Election after the Aragalaya - the Peoples Uprising of 2022, must drive a clean up and system change, but it must be not "Passive" but "Progressive" Good Governance. This requires pragmatic, dynamic, design of and timely implementation of solutions to economic challenges, including restructuring the nation's Balance Sheet-state owned enterprise reform, selective privatisation, whole or part divestment, listings on the stock exchange, ploughing funds received towards debt sustainability, while simultaneously addressing economic growth and the needs of the less privileged and vulnerable. That, is a tall order."

Thus, let's move beyond the "statistic" of a 2/3 majority for any. Such a majority is not healthy not because of the belief that "Check and Balance" will not be there. My definition of "Check" is neither constant objections, nor protests resulting in obstacles to desirable initiatives, nor abstaining, being silent or absent. "Balance" is not also, about simply balancing one extreme with another. I am for wholesome bi-partisan convergence and consensus, possible only when there is balance in representation in Parliament. The President and Parliament, Government and Opposition may have differing views but must work as a collective towards desirable initiatives. That maturity must prevail.

Nipuna Ranawaka - SLPP

If this government gains a two-thirds majority in Parliament, they could remove the priority given to Buddhism in the constitution and change Sri Lanka’s unitary status by fully implementing the 13th Amendment, as outlined in their election manifesto. President Mahinda Rajapaksa ended the three-decade war without even holding a simple majority in Parliament. Therefore, if someone truly has the ability to develop the country, they don’t need a two-thirds majority to do it.

Ruwan Wijewardene, Deputy Leader UNP
 
An absolute majority is not what is needed at this time. There has to be a balance in parliament to safeguard democracy and the citizens. In order for democracy to flourish a government with a simple majority and a vibrant opposition is needed. We must be aware that this present administration lacks experience in nation-building, so it’s vital that a good opposition plays a role in keeping the government in check. We as a country are still grappling with an economic crisis, so a government that lacks experience may make decisions that are short-sighted and risk impacting the fragile economic stability that was achieved in the last two years. The role of the opposition should not be to destabilise the government’s reform programme but to protect the people from harmful legislation that can impact society, the economy and the culture of our country.

Bhavani Fonseka - Senior Researcher/Attorney-at-Law, CPA.
 
Sri Lanka is confronted with multiple challenges from economic recovery, to the need for governance reforms, to addressing issues linked to a political solution, accountability and reconciliation with President Dissanayake making ambitious promises during the campaign trail. Whether promised structural reforms such as abolishing the executive reforms and repealing the PTA, among others, are delivered is dependent on the political resolve of the new government. A majority of seats in parliament to the NPP could facilitate the promised structural reforms; however, it also raises concerns of potential abuse of power, as evidenced by instances in recent years when governments have enjoyed a majority in parliament.

Therefore, it is imperative that a robust opposition emerge, capable of spearheading progressive reforms and providing a vital check and balance on executive action. It is equally important to have independent institutions and a vibrant civil society and media that can monitor and act as an effective check on executive overreach and abuse of power. As evidenced by the experience of Sri Lanka, vigilant citizenry and public mobilization are essential for ensuring accountability and advancing democratic reforms.

Prashan De Visser - Founder and President of Global Unites | General Secretary of the National Development Front | Contesting from the Gampaha District
 
A majority government will concentrate too much power in the hands of the ruling party, potentially leading to authoritarian tendencies, reduced accountability, and policies that may not reflect the broader interests of society.
 
A simple majority, on the other hand, encourages collaboration and compromise between the governing party and the opposition. This system promotes debate and collaboration ensuring that policies are thoroughly scrutinized before being enacted. A strong opposition holds the government accountable and serves as a check on executive power, reducing the risk of authoritarian overreach and especially corruption. Historically, a majority government has not had the interests of the people at heart but only fed the egos of those in power.
 
A structure that allows the government to act decisively but also requires consultation and respect for democratic processes is ideal.