Supervision in 19A: Dr Jayampathy responds to President

The President’s Counsel, Dr Jayampathy Wickramaratne, has issued a statement following a comment made by President Ranil Wickremesinghe on the drafting of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution.

On Friday, President Wickremesinghe, who attended a rally in Galle, apologized to the nation, saying the failure to reduce the maximum term of the president and parliament from six to five years was a failure of Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne.

“In 2015, we proposed a new constitutional amendment. Normally, I would have assigned this task to KN Choksi, a lawyer. But because he had passed away, the responsibility fell on lawyer Jayampathi Wickramaratne. He was unable to make the necessary revisions. This omission is regrettable and I apologise to the nation for this.“, said President Wickremesinghe.

Dr Wickramaratne, a former member of the Cabinet subcommittee appointed to oversee the 19th Amendment process, responded in a statement, making it clear that the entire amendment process at the time was aimed at avoiding a referendum.

Full statement:

On President Wickremesinghe’s statement that not amending Article 83 was a failure on my part

The President stated in Galle on 19 July 2024 that not reducing the upper term limit of the President and Parliament from six to five years during the preparation of the Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution was a mistake on my part due to my lack of experience. I want to set the record straight.

Presidential candidate Maithripala Sirisena signed a memorandum of understanding with 49 political parties and organisations led by Venerable Maduluwawe Sobitha Nayaka Thero at Viharamaha Devi Park, in which he promised to completely abolish the executive presidency.

However, the next day he signed another MOU with the Jathika Hela Urumaya, in which he promised not to introduce any constitutional amendment that would require a referendum. Mr. Sirisena’s election manifesto also stated that no constitutional reform would be initiated that would necessitate a referendum.

Shortly after his swearing in, President Sirisena appointed Mr Ranil Wickremesinghe as Prime Minister. Constitutional affairs were included as a subject under Prime Minister Wickremesinghe in the Government Gazette.

A Cabinet subcommittee headed by Prime Minister Wickremesinghe was appointed to oversee the process of the Nineteenth Amendment. The five-member team that prepared the first draft consisted of three retired civil servants who had served in very senior positions in the Legal Drafts Department, myself and another lawyer.

The entire drafting process was carried out on the basis that the bill would not be put to referendum for approval, in line with President Sirisena’s election promise.

It was proposed to reduce the term of office of the president and parliament from six to five years. However, the maximum term of six years was not changed, because that would require a referendum.

Article 83 of the Constitution provides that a bill that seeks to amend certain articles or is contrary to the said upper limits must be passed by a two-thirds majority in Parliament and approved by the people in a referendum. It is essential to note that Article 83 itself is included in the list of provisions that require a referendum.

The various drafts that were prepared were all shared and discussed with the Cabinet subcommittee. The draft that was finally approved by the Cabinet subcommittee was then sent to the Legal Draftsman, who took it over as required by law and made some changes.

It was then sent to the Attorney General, who was of the opinion that certain clauses, particularly some that limited the powers of the President, would require a referendum. Prime Minister Wickremesinghe had several meetings with the Attorney General to discuss the matter. I attended one of those meetings. Several amendments had to be made to the bill because of the Attorney General’s position.

Prime Minister Wickremesinghe introduced the bill to Parliament. When it was challenged in the Supreme Court, the Attorney General argued on behalf of the government that no provision required a referendum.

The provisions that the Supreme Court had deemed required a referendum were amended or repealed by Parliament.

In view of the above, I regret that President Wickremesinghe has seen fit to place the entire blame on me for not reducing the maximum terms of office for the President and Parliament.

I repeat that the whole amendment process was aimed at avoiding a referendum, following President Sirisena’s promise in the presidential elections.

(Dr) Jayampathy Wickramaratne

Attorney for the President

July 20, 2024