18 October 2023 09:34 am Views - 1914
By Kelum Bandara
The Supreme Court’s affirmation of the expulsion of former Minister Naseer Ahmad from Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) led to the loss of his parliamentary seat. Now, Mr. Ali Zahir Moulana has taken oaths as an MP representing the SLMC in the House filling the vacancy created.
Article 99 (13) (a) of the Constitution says “Where a Member of Parliament ceases, by resignation, expulsion or otherwise, to be a member of a recognized political party or independent group on whose nomination paper (hereinafter referred to as the “relevant nomination paper”) his name appeared at the time of his becoming such Member of Parliament, his seat shall become vacant upon the expiration of a period of one month from the date of his ceasing to be such member,” The latest ruling will have a greater bearing on the political parties in maintaining discipline and decorum among its members who are sometimes inclined to switch sides merely for personal benefits rather than electoral desires. It enhances the capacity of the political parties to ensure stability by holding their members together. Any member, acting in contravention of collective decisions, can lose his parliamentary seat.
In the current context, the ruling will have a beneficial effect both on the government and the opposition in sustaining stability.
In parliamentary politics, crossovers - from the opposition to the government or vice versa - remained normal. When faced with shaky support from MPs and their striking demands, successive governments have often resorted to luring less steadfast parliamentarians from the opposition by making enticing offers, both overt and covert.
Similarly, there were instances in which MPs , marginalized by their own government, crossed the floor of the House to the other side to secure their political future. The MPs acted in this fashion in the past in absolute violation of the mandate they received from votes at the general election concerned. Often, the ruling party has benefited from such crossovers, while the opposition has seen its numbers decline in the House, occasionally leaving it without a significant voice to influence proceedings.
In today’s context, both the government and the opposition will have the advantage following the Supreme Court ruling. It is commonly understood that some MPs of the main opposition are eager to join the government in pursuit of ministerial perks. Likewise, a section of the ruling Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) is used to strike demands for Cabinet posts. Casually, SLPP MP S.B. Dissanayake, once, made a veiled threat to topple the government during the vote on the budget this year. Some opposition MPs are also used to collaborating with the government, voting in its favour, due to various forms of understandings reached ostensibly for their personal benefits.
The Supreme Court ruling currently serves as a barrier to the political manoeuvering and devious tactics employed by members from both sides of the House. This time, President Ranil Wickremesinghe is likely to have little concern about getting the annual budget passed. The ruling party MPs will find it challenging to ignore the ruling by the Chief Government Whip.
SLMC member Naseer Ahmad lost his parliamentary seat over his decision to vote for the budget in 2021 regardless of the party’s position to vote against.
Likewise, it will be difficult for any opposition MP to act against the order of the Chief Opposition Whip of Parliament. Such an act will amount to the breach of the party discipline.
It will be interesting to see how the two SLPP factions – the Dulles Alahapperuma group and the Anura Priyadharshana Yapa group – vote during the upcoming budget. They have been elected on the ticket of the SLPP and naturally bound to follow the orders of the party. In the overall context, the government and the opposition will have little to worry about the possible political pole-vaults this time given the Supreme Court ruling.