Gajalakshmi Paramasivam

01 July  2019

Twin Apex Powers

[When the 1972 constitution was being prepared and when J.R. suggested executive presidency, Dr.Colvin R. de Silva said don’t have two centres of power at the Apex of the state.

Then Dudley (Senanayake) said at the constituent assembly, opposing J.R.’s proposal – “this may have worked in France and the US for historical reasons but it won’t work for our kind of countries”. This is what we have now, two power centres, because the original 19-A was diluted.“I think we have gone quite close to parliamentary form of government, we must complete that,” he said it is the only way to fulfill the Janaury 8, 2015 promises made to the people and Ven.Sobhitha Thera.

He said that the Sama Samaja party has always backed a parliamentary form of government. Referring to MP Dayasiri Jayasekera’s comments that he (Dr Wickremaratne) being the main architect of ‘ 19-A’, had deceived the president, Dr.Wickramaratna said, “I think president is above such baseless comments.”] Sunday Observer article headed ‘Redress 19A flaws with 20A -Dr Jayampathy’

We make decisions :

(i)             To ‘show’ immediate outcomes that would benefit us

(ii)           To satisfy the laws applicable  to a group that we are part of

(iii)         As per the truth within us.

Let us take Dr Jayampathy’s  statement “I think we have gone quite close to parliamentary form of government, we must complete that,” (he said) it is the only way to fulfil the Janaury 8, 2015 promises made to the people and Ven.Sobhitha Thera.”

Why is the government bound to fulfil the January 8, 2015 promises to the People AND to Ven Sobhitha Thera – Is it not because we already had two Apex powers before the 19^th Amendment or even before the 1978 Constitution – one Buddhist and the other the power of the People through their elected representatives? The 1972 Constitution created that twin Apex power. The 1978 constitution made the Sri Lankan power sharing into three aspects – like the Hindu Holy Trinity – Bramah the Creator, Vishnu the Protector and Shiva the Destroyer – of Body / Form consciousness. Since Buddha said ‘Aasai Aramin’ / Riddance of Desire – we could take it that Lord Buddha is the Buddhist parallel of  Hindu Lord Shiva. The People who elect government are Bramah. The Executive is Vishnu who protects the form that represents Truth. By wanting to satisfy a Buddhist leader – did the 19^th Amendment to the Constitution separate Non-Buddhists from Buddhists? Did that result in the President not connecting to the minds of other Apex leaders by religion – for example Muslims and Christians who became aliens to each other as well as to Buddhists?

If the Constitution  makes us non-Buddhists,  juniors to Buddhists – and we take that position – as we often do when we migrate to Western countries – what effect does it have on the real? What happened when Mr John Howard remained silent – when Ms Pauline Hanson asked us migrants to go back ‘home’. I got ready to go back to Sri Lanka but Lord Murugan prevented me and asked me to become an Equal Opposition. In contrast – Tamil militants who became juniors in India and Muslim militants who because juniors in the Middle East – promoted their own parallel to Buddhist autocracy. To the extent they are punished more than their Buddhist parallels they  – make  the democratic powers of the Constitution lifeless.  In essence, one who is empowered by Buddhism has no authority over those who are empowered by other religions nor democracy.

Each time a leader who came to power by claim (express or understood)  of promoting Buddhism draws benefits as per the system of Democracy s/he becomes indebted to Democracy. That indebtedness becomes a sin when there is change in the power structure. Once it becomes a sin – the system of Truth is in control and some of us become the media through which the system of Truth manifests the outcomes. In the case of Bramah group – the connections would be visible. In the case of Vishnu group – the connections would be commonly known. In the case of Shiva group – only quiet belief would help identify with the connection between cause and effect. That group renders eternal power to the constitution because they and the constitution are One.

Dr Jayampathy indicates the lack of this absolute ownership power as follows:

[Dr.Wickramaratne said a small group of lawyers, who had experience in Constitutional law, were assigned to prepare the initial draft of the amendment, in consultation with the cabinet Sub-committee. The original draft of 19-A, provided for the complete abolition of the executive presidency preserving the provisions which allowed the president to be elected by the people. This was retained since, the idea was not to make changes that will necessitate a referendum.

“That’s because we had told the country at the beginning that we will avoid a referendum. And we were aware that to change the mode of the election a referendum would be needed.”

“The president’s commitment was very clear - to abolish the executive presidency at the outset. We went along with that, and the cabinet subcommittee gave us direction. We also provided our own inputs.”]

The process of  referendum is bypassed only when the architects are driven by absolute faith. Such would be confirmed when blame is accepted instead of being shifted – including to the president who relied heavily on votes. Such influence belongs in category (i) – i.e.  to show immediately. This happens when we are in the company of those driven by politics through apparent majority rather than governance by One.

The sixth amendment to the constitution happened  due to fear of return of karma in the form of Hindu power of India through Tamil militants. As per this amendment:

[(1) No person shall, directly or indirectly, in or outside Sri Lanka, support, espouse, promote, finance, encourage or advocate the establishment of a separate State within the territory of Sri Lanka. (2) No political party or other association or organization shall have as one of its aims or objects the establishment of a separate State within the territory of Sri Lanka. ]

If Sri Lanka is a Buddhist  state – the above is in breach of article 9 which states:

[The Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the Buddha Sasana, while assuring to all religions the rights granted by Articles 10 and 14(1)(e).]

One to whom the land is the temple and the customs of that land is the religion – has to be protected by the Government.

If Sri Lanka is a Democratic   state – then article 9 is in breach of articles 1 & 2 which state:

[1. Sri Lanka (Ceylon) is a Free, Sovereign, Independent and Democratic Socialist Republic and shall be known as the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka. 2. The Republic of Sri Lanka is a Unitary State.]

Article 9 thus contradicts articles 1 & 2 and needs to be repealed. An article without belief – continuously dilutes the sovereignty of the Constitution and those who use the constitution largely to derive personal benefits.

To the extent these provisions are ‘to show ‘ – they promote hearsay values in the users. Dr Jayampathy is also a victim of such ‘hearsay’ influence.

Ultimately we develop our own true structures for better or for worse. Those who identify that to be ‘worse’ need to surrender to those who have developed structures that are for better. If the gap of separation becomes too wide – such surrender becomes impossible.