Presidential commissions set up for political reasons

Senior lecturer at the Department of Philosophy at the University of Peradeniya Dr. Charitha Herath, while commending the role played by parliamentary watchdog committees such as the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE), charged that presidential commissions have been appointed solely for political reasons.

Below are excerpts of his interview with The Sunday Morning:

Have the number of presidential commissions appointed in the recent past served any real purpose?

These parliamentary standing committees are a continuous exercise throughout our country’s democratic history. I think they are making good progress, but these presidential commissions with specialised focuses are appointed with political aspirations – whoever it’s been.

For example, the committee appointed to look at the late Sirimavo Bandaranaike’s political rights and similar commissions have been appointed for political purposes. The same thing happened when the new Government came into power in 2015 on a campaign of allegations against the former Government on various issues of corruption. They had to go and appoint presidential commissions to try and prove their allegations and fulfil their rhetoric. I think all these commissions have submitted various reports but no real progress has been made on their findings.

The Presidential Commission on the Central Bank Bond Scam, which was also appointed for political reasons, was also futile, because I don’t see how a commission appointed by the Government would really question the Prime Minister of that very same Government and prove his involvement in the scam. This is part of the political game played in this country. Any future government will also appoint more commissions and it will continue as it has so far.

Dr. Charitha Herath

"The Presidential Commission on the Central Bank Bond Scam, which was also appointed for political reasons, was also futile, because I don’t see how a commission appointed by the Government would really question the Prime Minister of that very same Government and prove his involvement in the scam"

"These commissions are not part of the judicial system but are politically motivated and are politically biased – fully if not marginally. So I don’t think appointing commissions will disregard the judicial system of the country"

"I think these so-called mainstream Colombo-based civil societies are not true civil societies. Civil societies should have some members who can motivate and campaign on various issues, instead of just making statements from Colombo hotels or carrying out workshops in Colombo hotel rooms"

Do the commissions have teeth to properly investigate some of the practices they have been mandated to look into?

Actually, they have good people in these commissions. I have no issue with the calibre of the personalities who have been appointed to these commissions. The problem is that the reasons for these commissions to be appointed are politically motivated.

By having commissions of this nature, are we placing doubt on our judicial system to the effect that they cannot properly deal with these very same cases?

This is a very important issue you raise. I don’t know whether the judiciary is being questioned by the appointment of these commissions because the judiciary is a different setup in this country and has an important role which they have successfully played.

These commissions are not part of the judicial system but are politically motivated and are politically biased – fully if not marginally. So I don’t think appointing commissions will disregard the judicial system of the country.

Parliamentary watchdog committees such as COPE have been established to propose action against State malpractice and shortcomings, but very little action has been taken thus far. How do you see this?

As I said before, I have high regards and respect for the parliamentary standing committees such as the Committee on Public Enterprise or the Public Accounts Committee; but there are some issues with the powers of these parliamentary committees. What they could do is, they could direct the government agencies to take legal action against persons they have investigated. The findings of these committees must be investigated once they have submitted their reports to Parliament. These parliamentary committees are an important part of Sri Lanka’s parliamentary system and they should be enhanced and protected.

Do you think there needs to be a bigger role played by the civil society in keeping checks and balances?

I have queries and worries about the mainstream civil societies in this country. I called them Colombo civil societies because these are the people who have formed small organisations to identify with a foreign donor to get funding, and then go on to enjoy media publicity by making various statements and allegations.

I think these so-called mainstream Colombo-based civil societies are not true civil societies. Civil societies should have some members who can motivate and campaign on various issues, instead of just making statements from Colombo hotels or carrying out workshops in Colombo hotel rooms.

I think there are groups of civil partners, especially at the village level, such as microcredit associations or Sanasa Bank associations that are the real civil societies, but are never recognised as such. I agree that civil society should have a bigger and more important role, but it cannot be groups who just make statements from hotel rooms.

What best practices can we adopt from other countries when fighting corruption?

The issues of corruption should have been handled in several ways. One is the legal system where I think we must bring in the technical knowhow into the legal system so that they could tackle complicated and advanced cases of corruption.

The second thing is to develop a common dialog between different segments of society that corruption must be investigated and stopped.

Thirdly, I think parliamentary democracy should be reinvented in Sri Lanka because it has become very different right now. People in the present Parliament think that being a parliamentarian means merely attending funerals and parties and living in Colombo. They don’t know that policymaking is their main role. Instead, they go to Parliament and insult each other, waste time, and go home. So the country must reinvent the parliamentary system.

We are suffering right now because of the Parliament and not the President, because instead of fixing the problems of the country, they go to Parliament and engage in petty politics. (SG)