Last week was marked by two events that could be of immense political significance in the coming months: the detection of a Parliamentarian at the Colombo Airport with a substantial amount of gold and the removal of the Head of the Public Utilities Commission of Sri Lanka (PUCSL) by Parliament.
The two events were unrelated to each other but highlight the volatile political climate of the country and may signal the direction in which the electorate could swing to, as voters head towards major elections, a Presidential Election being the poll that is due first, needing to be held by October 2024.
It was Puttalam District Member of Parliament Ali Sabry Raheem who made headlines first. He was nabbed by Customs officials after arriving from Dubai. Entering from the VIP lounge of the airport, he was detected to have in his baggage gold worth 74 million rupees and 91 mobile phones.
Raheem was questioned, fined 7.5 million rupees- one tenth the value of the gold- and released. There has been a public uproar since then with critics stating that the fine was not in keeping with the gravity of the offence and questions have been raised as to why he wasn’t dealt with more severely.
The Parliamentarian himself has protested his innocence stating that his bags were packed by an assistant and that he was therefore falsely implicated. However, by paying the fine he has accepted culpability. Also, as a Member of Parliament, such an excuse stretches the limits of credulity.
It was after this incident that attention focused on Raheem, a hitherto lesser-known backbencher from the Puttalam District. Initially a member of the All Ceylon Makkal Congress (ACMC) led by Rishad Bathiudeen, he contested the 2020 General Election from the Muslim National Alliance (MNA).
Although the ACMC was a partner in the alliance led by the main Opposition party, the Samagi Jana Balawegaya (SJB), Raheem has forged his own political path, opting to vote with the ruling Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) on key issues, most notably the 20th Amendment to the Constitution.
Since then, he has voted with the Government on many crucial votes in Parliament. As a result, Raheem finds himself in a somewhat unique position, where he was elected as an Opposition MP, has voted with the Government recently and was viewed as an ally by the ruling party until this incident.
Soon after Raheem’s release following the payment of the fine imposed by Customs, he attended Parliament where another crucial vote- to remove PUCSL Chairman Janaka Ratnayake- was taking place. There, he generated more controversy by supporting the Opposition, voting against the motion.
Asked about his decision, Raheem was to say that following his detention at the airport, he had contacted the Secretary to the President Saman Ekanayake and Prime Minister Dinesh Gunawardena to seek their intervention in the matter. They had refused to do so, Parliamentarian Raheem said.
“If such injustice takes place when I am with the Government and they don’t help me, there is no reason to be with the Government. That is why I voted against the Government,” Raheem told the media after the vote. This has caused more consternation both in the Government and the Opposition.
Raheem’s comments imply that the highest levels of Government should have intervened in a matter that is under the purview of Customs officials. If that occurred, it would go against all the principles of good governance, law and order and the standard of conduct expected from elected representatives.
Meanwhile, the Opposition has claimed Raheem voted against the Government with the knowledge of the ruling party. They claim this was because the Government was assured that they had sufficient votes to pass the motion against Ratnayake and wanted to distance themselves from Raheem.
These are reasons why the Opposition took the lead in suggesting to Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena that a motion be presented to Parliament seeking Raheem’s expulsion from the legislature. However, it is unclear whether such a motion will be endorsed by Parliament.
The incident involving Raheem has drawn comparisons with events of over four decades ago when J.R. Jayewardene was President. It involved Anura Daniel, the MP for Hewaheta and the youngest MP in the Parliament elected in the United National Party (UNP) landslide at the 1977 election.
In 1982, Daniel was found guilty of smuggling gold, a consignment of watches and garments from Singapore. President Jayewardene ensured that Daniel was removed from Parliament but then nominated his sister Rupa Sriyani Daniel to replace him, attracting public criticism for this move.
In a sense, it is ironical that at a time when President Jayewardene’s nephew is President, a MP should engage in the same offence. There is now an expectation that President Wickremesinghe will also adopt a tough stance against Ali Sabry Raheem and encourage his removal from Parliament.
However, removal of a MP from Parliament cannot be achieved simply by a resolution for expulsion being passed by Parliament. While Section 66(i) of the Constitution states that removal of a MP is possible through a resolution passed in Parliament, it refers to Section 81 which details this process.
Section 81 stipulates that such an expulsion is possible only after the appointment of a Special Presidential Commission and the Commission finding a MP guilty of such acts as to warrant expulsion. This is the provision that was used against former Prime Minister Sirima Bandaranaike.
This, even if it eventuates, is a time-consuming process and it is debatable whether the effort is worthwhile. Opposition Parliamentarians have expressed the view that, by passing a resolution against Raheem, it could compel him to resign, thus sparing the need for a Special Presidential Commission.
These circumstances do provide an opportunity for President Ranil Wickremesinghe to demonstrate his commitment to good governance. He can do so by prevailing on Ali Sabry Raheem to resign or by persuading the Government group in Parliament to censure him through a special motion.
At a time when there is a clamour for clean Government President Wickremesinghe can bolster his standing among the voting public by acting decisively against Raheem, even if it means one less vote in Parliament for the ruling party- just as his uncle, President Jayewardene did against Anura Daniel.
The other event of political value last week was Parliament passing a motion to remove PUCSL Chairman Janaka Ratnayake from office. Ratnayake had opposed the Government’s decision to raise electricity tariffs and had been at loggerheads with Power and Energy Minister Kanchana Wijesekera.
Ratnayake was nominated as PUCSL Chairman during the tenure of Gotabaya Rajapaksa. He is on record as saying he owed his position to his contributions to the Presidential Election campaign of President Rajapaksa. However, he later began to oppose the Government’s stance on electricity tariffs.
The vote on the motion to remove Ratnayake was significant. It provided an opportunity for the Government to test its strength in Parliament amidst speculation that some members of the SLPP were apprehensive about supporting the removal of an official who advocated relief for the public.
Ratnayake, being a nominee of former President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, was no favourite of the Opposition at the outset. Nevertheless, the Opposition voted against his removal with the intention of both embarrassing the Government as well as testing its strength on the floor of the House.
The Government passed the motion against Ratnayake comfortably, by 123 votes to 77 votes, a majority of 46 votes. This indicates that, though popular sentiment at the grassroots level remains unknown in the absence of recent elections, the Government retains its majority in Parliament.
Notably several ‘opposition’ or ‘independent’ MPs, including Kumara Welgama, Duminda Dissanayake, Vadivel Suresh, John Seneviratne, Anura Priyadarshana Yapa and A.H.M. Fowzie voted with the Government, supporting the motion to remove Janaka Ratnayake as Head of the PUCSL.
These mini-battles will continue to be played out in time to come as both the Government and the Opposition take stock of the political climate. This is indeed a build up to the next national polls, the deadline for which is slowly but surely approaching with less than eighteen months to go, at the most.
Picture by Sulochana Gamage
Add new comment