Executive Presidency : Reform not Abolish
Sri Lanka’s Economic Crisis in 2022 has been a matter which has received wide international attention. Arguably, a fair share of this attention has been drawn by social unrest and political turbulence which ensued following the rapid depletion of the government’s foreign reserves, leading the country to a pre-emptive default, the first ever one since its independence in 1948. As the state holds a monopoly in the distribution of gas and fuel in the island, the foreign reserves crisis resulted in a shortage of these items, delivering a rather crippling blow on the daily economic activities of many. Adding insult to injury, long drawn out power cuts became the norm in many parts of the country as the government faced difficulties in importing coal for power plants (Coal powered power plants account to more than 50% of the contribution to the country’s electricity grid).
A Crisis Brewing
While the present crisis, which was unprecedented in Sri Lanka’s history since independence, was first encountered by recently resigned President Mr. Gotabaya Rajapakse and his cabinet, it was a crisis which was compounding over a period of time, and the Rajapakse government’s failures were only a part of Sri Lanka’s chronic fiscal mismanagement.
Sri Lanka’s trade deficit began to rise sharply from 2019 onwards as the revenue of the country’s tourism industry reduced significantly owing to the Easter Sunday Attacks. The economic growth of the country had also contracted in that year. Gotabaya Rajapakse, was sworn in as the president in November 2019. The haphazard tax cuts implemented by the regime in 2019 had not stimulated the increase of business activities as expected and the government’s budget deficit rose significantly by the end of 2020 as the COVID-19 pandemic had an adverse impact on the Sri Lanka’s tourism revenue and the revenue generated by many other businesses as well. The government had to burrow more in order to finance the increasing budget deficit.
As a USD 1 billion payment of International Sovereign Bonds (ISBs) issued by Sri Lanka was due by July 2022, the Finance Ministry was in a precarious state by March 2022 as it had struggled to secure finances for importing fuel and coal for power generation. The Central Bank declared a pre-emptive default by 20th May 2022 as it was unable to repay the ISB instalment due in July 2022.
Enter the Juggernaut
Executive Presidency has been a contentious subject in Sri Lankan politics. The post of executive presidency was modeled on the presidency introduced by the constitution of the Fifth French Republic, only quite more powerful than legislative and the judiciary. There numerous constitutional amendments were centred on limiting or increasing the powers of the executive president.
Sri Lanka drafted its first national constitution since independence in 1972. Sri Lanka retained a Westminster mode of governance without the Monarchy since then. The second amendment to the constitution was introduced in 1978 which transformed Sri Lanka’s mode of governance from the Westminster Parliamentary System to a Semi Presidential System similar to that which was introduced in France. A Semi Presidential System has aspects of both Westminster mode of governance and a full Presidential System where a President, who is the head of the executive, is elected from popular vote and the Prime Minister, who commands the confidence of the Parliament, holds position as the deputy head of the executive.
The post of executive presidency has been vested with broad executive powers from its inception. The executive president has many prerogatives with regard to the matters of the parliament, judiciary and administrative services in Sri Lanka. Moreover, the executive president has legal immunity from all civil and criminal proceedings in Sri Lanka and an ex president cannot be litigated for any of the decisions which he has made during their time in office.
The impeachment process of the president has several checks which should be passed and passing all of these checks is quite difficult in reality. The process for ratifying the vacation of the office of the president on grounds of bribery, treason or any other offence requires a special resolution signed by minimum two-thirds of the total members of the parliament ( or a resolution signed by one half of the total members of the parliament and affirmed by the speaker), and this resolution should be referred by the speaker to the supreme court, where the Supreme Court shall conduct a trial and deliberate on the allegations and the eligibility of the incumbent to remain in office.
The 17th Amendment to the constitution of Sri Lanka was introduced with the intention of diluting presidential powers and bestowing them in a more politically diverse Constitutional Council. By provisions of this amendment, this council consists of the President, Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition, members nominated by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition and members who are nominated by the parliament who do not belong to the same political party as the President or the Prime Minister.
The 18th Amendment to the constitution which was drafted and ratified during the tenure of then president Mahinda Rajapakse-led government in 2010 reduced the powers vested in the consitutional council signifcantly, and granted the president wide discretion in making appointments in the judiciary and public service. Moreover, the two term limit on presidency was also scrapped. The Executive Presidency had been concentrated with unchecked power.
Many of the unchecked powers placed on the executive presidency by the 18th Amendment were repealed and placed on the constitutional council by the 19th Amendment which was drafted and passed during the tenure of President Maithripala Sirisena and his coalition government. With the 19th Amendment, the governance structure tilted towards a Parliamentary System where the Prime Minister has more say in appointing the cabinet, and the president’s ability to dissolve the parliament has been restricted.
The 20th Amendment to the constitution, which was drafted by then president Gotabaya Rajapakse’s cabinet (and passed conveniently since his political party had two-thirds majority in the parliament), provided several unchecked powers on the executive presidency by repealing several provisions of previous constitutional amendments. The Constitutional Council was abolished, and a Parliamentary council was established with a limited observational role over president’s appointments of commissions overseeing public service. The president was given the authority to dismiss the Prime Minister and any member of the cabinet at their sole discretion.
The recent economic woes and certain blunders made by the cabinet led by Gotabaya Rajapakse had stirred public discontent and the government’s approval ratings had plummeted to an all-time low by the first quarter of 2022. The unimpeachable state of then president and the wide range of powers being granted to him meant he was indeed a force to be reckoned with. This has created a public dialogue about the dangers of executive presidency and that it needs to be abolished in favor of a Parliamentary system of governance. The opposition has been pushing for this particular change as well.
The Types of Government
There are largely three types of governments based on their structure: Parliamentary System, Semi Presidential System and Presidential System.
Parliamentary System
In a parliamentary system, the head of the government is elected by the parliament and he is accountable to the parliament. The parliament can collectively dismiss the Prime Minister. A parliament may consist of only one house of representatives (unicameral) or two house of representatives (bicameral). In the case of bicameral parliaments, traditionally, the lower house consists of representatives who are directly elected by voters and the upper house consists of representatives who are either directly elected by a separate election or appointed by a separate mechanism.
In practice, there are two models of the parliamentary system:
- Westminster System
- Consensus System
The Westminster system originated in the United Kingdom and it is prevalent in several other countries such as Canada and Malaysia. The parliament in a Wesminster system is often bicameral where there are two chambers in the Parliament. In the United Kingdom, for an example, the house of commons has directly elected representatives and the house of lords consists of unelected members who are appointed by the Monarchy. While the house of commons passes laws, the House of Lords serve as an additional check on the law being passed and their approval is required for a draft bill to become law.
The Consensus system is present in western European countries. One notable difference between the Westminster system and the Consensus system is the mode of election of representatives. In the consensus system, the proportional representational system is used to elect representatives where several representatives can be elected from an electorate proportional to their votes. In countries where the Westminster system is practiced (particularly in the United Kingdom), the plurality voting system is often used.
The Presidential System
A presidential system (also known as the single executive system) is a system of governance where a President is the head of the government and leads the executive branch which is separate from the legislative branch. In contrast to a parliamentary system, the executive branch in a presidential system does not originate from the legislative branch. In most cases, the president is elected by a popular vote, and is unimpeachable by the legislative unless under certain conditions which are laid out by the constitution. The first presidential system which came into practice was in the United States when the country’s constitution was enacted in 1789.
A presidential system has several unique characteristics contrast to the parliamentary system. One such notable feature is the separation of powers in the government. In a Parliamentary system, the executive is practically a part of the Parliament. The Parliament can collectively dismiss an executive at its discretion. In a Presidential system, the head of the executive is elected by a popular vote and the executive branch is appointed by the president. The executive branch is not part of the legislature and there is a clear separation of powers between the executive and the legislature. With proper rules set by the constitution, this facilitates a system of checks and balances where the two branches can scrutinize each other’s actions.
Another important feature in a presidential system is that, given that the president is the head of the government and that he is elected from popular vote, the president can exercise certain powers without being constrained by parliamentary approval. This makes the government more able to respond more swiftly to contingencies.
The Presidential System contain certain notable flaws. One is the likelihood of a political gridlock happening when the executive and the legislature are not on the same page.
Semi Presidential System
A Semi Presidential System incorporates features of both parliamentary systems and presidential systems. A Semi Presidential System is also known as a dual executive system where a president (who is usually elected through a popular vote) leads an executive with a Prime Minister and a cabinet drawn from the legislature. While the executive is appointed by the president, the Parliament can dismiss the Prime Minister and the cabinet through a vote of no confidence. A notable unique advantage of the semi-presidential system is that it achieves the separation of powers and the efficiency of a presidential system and mitigates the possibility of a political gridlock between the executive and legislature
Why keep the Executive Presidency?
The office of Executive Presidency in Sri Lanka bears wide powers. The 20th Constitutional Amendment brought by then president Mr. Gotabaya Rajapakse’s administration has broadened the extent of unchecked power vested in executive presidency. This facilitates dictatorial tendencies, and it is imperative that certain powers vested in the president should deserve parliamentary oversight.
Sri Lanka currently has a semi-presidential system where the executive president is the head of the government yet the other members of the cabinet are appointed from the legislature. The Prime Minister, who commands the confidence of the parliament, is the deputy leader of the executive and has a considerable say in the allocation of ministerial portfolios. The president has the prerogative to dissolve the parliament after a compulsory time period stipulated by the constitution.
The existence of an executive presidency is important for this model of semi-presidential system to function effectively. Much of the inefficiencies of a parliamentary system can be mitigated as well as the chances of an unpopular parliament remaining in power can be reduced as the executive will be able to dissolve the parliament and proceed to general elections. As the Prime Minister and the Cabinet are effectively Members of the Parliament, there won’t be political gridlocks between the legislative and the executive as in full presidential systems.
Conclusion
Sri Lanka’s office of executive presidency is much powerful than the legislature such that it leaves room for dictatorial tendencies. The recent development in Sri Lankan politics has sparked a public dialogue on the abolition of executive presidency and the establishment of a parliamentary system of governance. However, Sri Lanka’s prevalent semi-presidential system, with proper reforms ensuring that the executive presidency’s unchecked dictatorial powers are stripped, has the potential to become a more advanced, efficient and liberal form of governance than a parliamentary system. Hence, reforming the current system instead of abandoning it for another appears to be the best choice for the Sri Lankan republic.
