When members are elected to Parliament through 1972 constitution - First Past the Post system (FPPS) Candidates directly goes to the voters within a well-defined area and, Whereas in 1978 constitution – PR System (PRS) candidates are exposed to the voters through party symbol only since, few electorates of 1972 constitution are amalgamated to one electoral district which is too large and too highly populated to identify who it is, representing them, but the political party; hence peoples’ supremacy has been transferred into a party leader. In other words the processing of candidature is such in FPPS smaller electorate of voters introduces the candidate to a political party where as in the PRS the party leader introduces the candidate to the voter. One of the party leader becomes an Executive President as well.
In
FPPS few thousands of ten and in PRS few hundred thousand exercise their
franchise to elect their representatives in Parliament, on behalf of a
particular party though directly in FPPS & in PRS indirectly. Therefore in
both the system, the elects do not have the right to cross over to another
political party whatsoever, based on the simple basic fact that a pluralistic
collective aspiration to elect one, cannot be nullified by an individual desire
or collective desire. Therefore all crossovers to either sides should be
discouraged and eliminated and people’s supremacy reinstated in the parliamentary
process.
In
a Democracy People should have more say than the Party Leaders!
In
the present context there is an urgent need to change the Parliamentary
constituencies lacking accountability and responsibilities towards voters and
abdicating the Executive power of Presidency
except Sovereignty and Law and Order simultaneously is most welcoming; too
bulky members for a too large electoral district – As A Tamil Proverb
describes appropriately and very critically “கும்பலில் கோவிந்தா”- “Kumbalil Kovindha”- means be
in a flock to evade accountability & responsibility -
puts the peoples’ supremacy the fundamental of Parliamentary Democracy in
doldrums. Realising this and other critical reasons a Parliamentary select
committee has been deliberating on this matter and as far as I can remember
arrived to a conclusion – 70% first past the post system (FPPS) of the 1972
constitution and 30 % of present proportionate representation (PPR) – that
means around 150 members thru FPPS and 75 thru PPR- though yet to be finalised.
The
FPPS based on the 1972 constitution elected 168 members from 160 electorates
the smallest unit to elect a member for parliament (154) with 2 of 3 and 4 of 2
multi member seats. This factor cannot
be ignored what so ever because it had been existed for a while and the people
had been represented by that- thus a reduction in electorates becomes very
sensitive issue. What may be suggested here is that proposed 70% FPPS should
equal at least or more i.e. 160 or 161 preferably 168 members (thus avoids
fresh delimitation thru re-enacting that section of the 1972 constitution)
which warrants the increase the number of parliament members to 240 and the
rest 80 is set against PPR National List , both of which is quite reasonable as
for the period passed over and for the good effects of PPR to which it is meant
for especially another A. Amirthalingham cannot occupy the post of Opposition
Party Leader. Overlapping responsibilities and evading accountabilities worst
reflected in the PPR can be minimized through these changes it is hoped.
What is suggested here is that the proposed 70% FPPS
should at least equal 168, though only 160 members are elected directly and
thus avoids fresh delimitation thru re-enacting that section of the 1972
constitution, and the balance 30% (PPR) Proportionate Representation warrants
the increase the number of parliament members to 240; the rest 8 + 72 is set appropriately as PPR National List,
MPs in order to keep the electoral process as much as possible very simple with
an aim of reducing the number of votes that are rejected. This 70% FPPS and 30%
PPR are very critical values in that lesser the FPPS and higher the PPR than
the prescribed percentage value would be very detrimental to the entire
process; here the PPR is adjusted to the critical maximum adding 08
members and no any lost candidate off
FPPS shall be accommodated as Nationalistic List MP, since it inclines to
retain the same worst out come off PPR, and all eligible parties shall use the
Nationalistic List to allocate representation for the Professional Specialists
and particularly women. The lowest number of votes polled by a winning
candidate through FPPS becomes the criterion for all the political parties to
qualify for national list MPs nominations.
If parliamentary seats are 240 and allotment for PRS
becomes 80, if 160 are elected through FPPS, that will re-introduce returning
of Individual independent as MPs as
well, should also be Determining the political parties that would gain access
for a minimum one seat becomes an important issue, since both FPPS and PRS two
different criterions are in place to elect members for one chamber that upholds
the People’s Supremacy, through representation in thus the Supreme Parliament.
The
issue of allotment of 80 members of Nationalistic List, would arise only after
the completion of FPPS electoral process of a particular General Election. This
would pave way for calculation of which are the political parties to be offered
seats and how many each party will receive to be represented in the Supreme
Parliament. The Basic for PRS qualification should be that of minimum number of
votes polled by a winning candidate in just concluded FPPS election from the
entire 160 electorates, whatever the count it may be. If it is 4567 votes that
returned a seat thru FPPS and all political parties that gained total of 4567
or more from entire electorates shall have attain minimum qualification for one
of among 80 seats in the parliament, though it does not by any means it secures
a seat; I opine that such a low situation would not arise and this is the best
way of application of the mixed system for Democracy.
A most appropriate method is to allocate these seats
through National Percentage of each political party polled and the Electoral
Districts based on percentage polled merit, but of preferential voting
directly. In
addition to the FPPS elected MPs, on minimum for population basis following
districts will select 3 members as of Nationalistic MPs -: Anuradhapura, Galle, Hambanttota,
Kegalle, Kurunegala, , Matala, Mattara, Monaragala, Polonnaruwa, Puttalam, and Vanni (11 electoral districts yielding 33
selected from the lists provided to Election Commissioner on the nomination day); 04 each will be selected from Ampara
Batticoloa Badulla, Kaluththura, Kandy, Jaffna, Gampaha Ratnapura and
Trinchomalee on the basis of multi-ethnic districts (09 electoral districts will
have selectees of 36);
Nuweraeliya will select 05 seats and Colombo district 06 respectively, both
will select a total 11on the same basis and population wise, all summed up to 80
nationalistic MPs.
Electoral
Districts
|
Seats
|
Basic
Rationale
|
1. Anuradhapura
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
2. Galle
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
3. Hambantotta
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
4. Kegalle
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
5. Kurunegala
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
6. Matala
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
7. Mattara
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
8. Monaragala
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
9. Polonnaruwa
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
10. Puttalam
|
03
|
Minimum Qualification
|
11. Vanni
|
03
|
Multi ethnic of 3 Admin. Districts
|
12. Ampara
|
04
|
Multi ethnic
|
13. Badulla
|
04
|
Multi ethnic
|
14. Batticoloa
|
04
|
Multi ethnic
|
15. Gampaha
|
04
|
Multi ethnic
|
16. Jaffna
|
04
|
Two amalgamated Admin. Districts
|
17. Kaluththura
|
04
|
Multi ethnic
|
18. Kandy
(Mahanuwara)
|
04
|
Multi ethnic
|
19. Ratnapura
|
04
|
Minimum Qualification
|
20. Trincomalee
|
04
|
Multi ethnic
|
21. Nuwera-eliya
|
05
|
Multi ethnic
|
22. Colombo
|
06
|
Multi ethnic
|
Total
|
80
|
This tabulation reveals that the Proportional Representation
even after reduction to 30% still holds enough strength for its manifestation
of the best as well the bad. In order to prevent PPR manifest the worse effects
again, it should be made compulsory for the FPPS MPs to open a Public
Electorate Office at their respective Electorates and inducted to work closely
with the people within the electorate, whereas it is ideal for PPR MPs to
concentrate in nationalistic committees and duties.
A constitutional guarantee should be laid in order
to perfectly uphold the People’s Supremacy to formulate and to dethrone a
government through the universal franchise to which Sri Lanka is proud for
since 1931. It is prescribed that, clauses should be included in the electoral
section of the constitution, banning all the crossovers to any elected
governing bodies, beginning from the day of nomination until within the final
45 days of the stipulated term of the particular elected body.
A
parliament formed by the mixed electoral system of FPPS and Proportional
Representation System, a Member of Parliament crossing over to either ruling
party or opposition party before the 45 days of term, will be ceased to
function as an MP and lose all the privileges installed upon becoming Member of
Parliament through the either system. If it is a member through FPPS there
should be a By-Election in the particular Electorate to fill the vacancy and if
it is a PPR member, next in line in the Nationalistic List for the particular
electoral district submitted to election commissioner along with the
nominations for FPPS in order to select the Nationalistic MPS. E.g. Vanni Electoral District has 3 electorates and all political parties in
the fray mandated to submit 4 names of proposed National List MPs, whom need
not necessarily to be from the same
district and thus termed as Nationalistic List MP, not in the real meaning of
"National List MPs of 1978 constitution", who would contribute more
towards nationalistic duties.
An
independent candidate, who is successfully returned to an elected governing
body, though shall hold the discretion of supporting either the party that forms
the government or the opposition party, any member elected through a registered
political party, cannot do so, but only through the sanction of the executive
committee of the particular political party through which he/she or
collectively has been elected. Anyway any member returned through a political
party may become an independent member by rendering his resignation any time,
from the political party elected him/her shall not join any other political
party until 90 days of acceptance of his resignation by that political party,
but it is the same political party’s discretion whether to apply the law of 45
days of term stipulation against that particular member even in this case. Any
elected member who has been dismissed and or through disciplinary action by a
political party, will cease to function as a member of any elected governing
body, and lose all the privileges born by that elected body and will be barred
from joining any other political parties, as well as contesting any election,
until the very next election is over.
Stern
exemplary actions be taken against, all of those (any) elected members who instigate,
and participate in any violence during election, and indulge and violating the
election laws should be arrested and remanded until the particular election is over through the proposed Independent Judicatory Commission – Election
Commission combination; the same should be applied against those any
Government Servants who are partial, fails to implement the election laws,
being part of propaganda, and shall be removed from their office, stripping off
the title he/she holds, imprisonment, and can mount up to freezing their
property – this follows a study revealing most of the Government Servants
actively involve politics to protect the ruling party in order to protect the
wealth they have illegally accumulated during the period concerned, and they
may become a part of toppling a democratically elected government as well.