On October 26, political confusion broke out in Sri  Lanka. President Sirisena who had for months been carrying on a running battle with his Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, without a warning announced, out of the blues so-to-say, had appointed the popular and charismatic former President Mahinda Rajapaksa as his Prime Minister. 

 
He added, in an almost after-thought, that he had sacked Ranil Wickremesinghe, the leader of the United National Party from his premiership as the Cabinet of Ministers had collapsed following the withdrawal of the United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) from the United National Front (UNF) Government which Mr. Wickremesinghe led. He also prorogued Parliament. 

While the writing on the wall for the so-called ‘Government of National Unity’ has been clear to all, it was the speed at which events unfolded that took the entire nation by surprise. 

Concerned citizens remain confused, many questioning whether the President’s action was ultra vires of the Constitution. They wonder whether it could lead to a breakdown in the rule of law, pondered whether it would lead to attempts to interfere in the system of justice in the country and how the ongoing stalemate will affect the national economy. 

Both leading political parties -- the UNP and the SLPP -- and their supporters claim to be acting within the Constitution. While ex-premier Wickremesinghe claims he is the lawful Prime Minister and remains at the official residence, Temple Trees, newly-appointed Prime Minister Rajapaksa is now operating the day-to-day business of the country from the Prime Minister’s Office at Flower Road. 

To add insult to injury, the arguments of our ‘intellectuals’ are often coloured by their political loyalties as it is the case even in ‘developed’ Western democracies. 

Professor Rajiva Wijesinha says there is no need to reconvene Parliament, especially he adds, as the Constitution itself is ambiguous regarding the dismissal of a Prime Minister. He suggests letting the judiciary decide on the matter, reconvening Parliament or calling for general elections. 
Trade union leader Dr. Wickremabahu Karunaratne has threatened to stage protests and riots against the removal of former PM Wickremesinghe and the prorogation of Parliament. 

Jehan Perera of the National Peace Council has described the dismissal of the premier as unconstitutional and a former Permanent Representative to the UN wants to know why Western countries had not pointed out wrongdoings committed by the Wickremesinghe regime! 
Leading members of the clergy too have taken partisan stands on the issue and a few have begun raising the scare of separatism compounding the existing confusion. 

In the immediate aftermath of the transfer of power, supporters of the President and the new Prime Minister in trade union movements at the SLBC, the Rupavahini Corporation and the print media prevented the politically-appointed leadership of the outgoing regime from functioning in their capacities in respective institutions. 

On Tuesday -- four days after Friday’s tumultuous events -- former Prime Minister Wickremesinghe’s supporters finally took to the streets in his support and the following day supporters of the deposed premier drove away State officials who attempted to inspect documents at Temple Trees, raising fears that violence may escalate. 

To make matters worse, representatives of foreign countries -- almost all belonging to the global West -- are beginning to involve themselves in the impasse which is highly uncalled for. Diplomats from a variety of Western countries led by the US and Britain are warning of consequences and have called for a reconvening of Parliament. 

Unsurprisingly, ordinary citizens have been left confused and fearful over what the future may hold as the country continues without direction and in a state of flux. 

In the Maldives, the Supreme Court made an intervention when the results of the recently held election were questioned. 

In Pakistan too, it was the court of justice which ruled against President Musharaff and more recently decided the fate of then Prime Minister Nawaz Sheriff. 

Can our politicians resolve this problem amicably or will our country too follow precedents set by Pakistan and the Maldives where courts of the land had to step in and take corrective action.