Joint opposition MP Udaya Gammanpila today accused the government of conspiring to further postpone the Provincial Council (PC) elections by debating the Provincial Council Election.

Amendment Bill instead of the 20 Amendment on Wednesday (20) while also planning to introduce a new amendment to the Bill which would determine the electoral system to be used to hold the PC elections. 

He said even though media had reported that the government would drop the 20th Amendment and go for the Provincial Council election since the Supreme Court had determined the 20th Amendment should be referred to the people at a referendum for approval, it had found a new strategy to further delay the PC election as they fear they will lose if polls were held now.

 
“The government has found a new strategy to delay the PC polls even more. There is a Bill pending called PC Elections Amendment Bill which secures minimum 30% representation for women in the Provincial Councils. Instead of the 20 A, the government intends to put this Bill up for debate on Wednesday (20). Then during the committee stage of the debate, they are going to introduce a new Amendment to the Bill which will decide on the electoral system to be used for the PC election.

 
Mr. Gammanpila said by doing so the government would be able to further postpone the PC election. “This is a conspiracy. This is against the constitution because according to article 78 of the constitution, before a Bill is debated and is approved in Parliament the government has a duty to gazette it at least two weeks prior to tabling it in Parliament. That is to give the people an opportunity to express their views and challenge it before the Supreme Court if they think it to be unconstitutional. If they introduce new material during the committee stage, people will be denied the opportunity to express their views as well as challenge it before the Supreme Court,” he said. 

He said according to the constitution, if an amendment is moved in Parliament during the committee stage the Attorney General should certify the constitutionality of the amendment and submit it to the Speaker. 

He said the Attorney General was duty-bound to inform the speaker that this kind of amendment was against the constitution but he acted with bias and in an unconstitutional manner certifying that the amendment brought in to the Local Government elections (Amendment) Bill which denied field officers the right to contest the LG polls. 

He said they would move a resolution against the Attorney General to remove him from his office, if he was going to neglect his constitutional duty and act with bias towards the government. “There is an Act called the Removal of Officers Special Provisions Act of 2002 which specifies that if the Attorney General or IGP acts in an unconstitutional or biased manner, Parliament can remove him by passing a resolution,” he said. (Ajith Siriwardana)