Archives

by Dr. Chandra Pinnagoda

The Swiss regions (called cantons) are not simple administrative regions. Each one is an autonomous Republic. Together they form the State of Switzerland called the Swiss Confederation (Confederation Helvetic.) One should now examine the provisions of Article 1. (1) of the Draft of August 2000; wherein, the powers of the regions and the centre shall be specified by the constitution.

Accordingly there is no determination to preclude the constitution from specifying the powers of independence and sovereignty to each (or some) of the regions. The Draft "The Republic of Sri Lanka is one free, sovereign and independent State....", as commonly understood, could also mean that the Republic of Sri Lanka is one among several other sovereign and independent states. In such a situation, the proposed regions of a future Republic of Sri Lanka shall have powers similar to the cantons of the Swiss confederation (for example, the canton of the Republic of Geneva).

Question

The question to be asked then is whether the majority ethnic group in the island of Sri Lanka would surrender such powers to the regions; whether a political solution is achievable. If an answer could be given in the affirmative, it means that the power of granting citizenship (or permanent or temporary residence permits) shall be vested in the regions (as such powers are shared between Swiss cantons and the confederation).

Logically, therefore the majority response shall be negative. The majority ethnic population in Sri Lanka, the Sinhala people, is confined to this island nation; whereas, fifty million Tamil people (of same ethnic origin as the majority people in Sri Lanka) live in South India alone. The Sinhala people have already expressed grave concern about extinction. Thus, one could argue that a future Region with powers to grant citizenship would cause a demographic imbalance if citizenship were granted to a large proportion of South Indians. Consequently, the majority race would be reduced to a minority in due course.

The author possesses personal experience in the matter of residency and naturalisation in the Republic of Geneva. In his capacity as the Founder President of the International Buddhist Foundation (IBF), the administrative authorities in the Republic of the Canton of Geneva originally refused an application made by him requesting a permit for the first Buddhist monk to reside in Switzerland.

The reason adduced was that the application did not justify a work permit. Finally, he won an appeal made to the Tribunal of the canton in 1993. The author expresses his gratitude to Bernard Gunatilleke, the then Permanent Representative (PR) to the United Nations (UN) in Geneva for the assistance given in this regard. Another application was made in 1999, for a second Buddhist monk (after the IBF was admitted as a Non-Governmental Organisation of the UN) to represent the IBF at the UN. In this instance, the canton of Geneva consulted with the federal adminstration in Bern to determine whether the quota for granting a permit should come from the federation (because of UN involvement) or from the canton, itself.

Final decision was in favour of the canton. In this process, the author acknowledges the kind assistance provided by Mr. Palihakkara, the then PR to the UN in Geneva. On the issue of citizenship, the author records that his children have been naturalised as citizens of the Republic of the Canton of Geneva (and not of Switzerland) residing in the commune of Grand Saconnex.

If one now examines the 1997 proposals, it is seen that the "entirety clause" is retained. There shall be only one independent and sovereign republic termed "the Republic of Sri Lanka" consisting of indissoluble union of Regions. Even in this instance it can be argued that the unitary character of the republic shall be destroyed, once a union of Regions is created. Furthermore, a union is required only when existing independent and sovereign states have to be unified.

Therefore, the author appeals to both the executive (the President) and the legislative (the Prime Minister) arms of the government to educate the public on proposals for constitutional amendment. The implications of the provision of various models (such as Canada and Australia, where autonomy of the "States" is even greater than that of Switzerland) of prevailing federal democracies should be divulged to the entire electorate, within the shortest possible delay, without leaving room for any controversy.

A unit could be established within the Peace Secretariat for this purpose. In this regard, the views expressed by the Forum of Federations should be noted positively but within limits. The Forum has stated that Sri Lanka has to develop its own federal model as "No two federal countries are equal in structure. Sri Lankan pattern and way of doing things must evolve". However the limitation is that the Forum will not have the capacity to advise Sri Lanka about the viability of the "power sharing" model that existed in Sri Lanka centuries prior to the birth of Canada or the United States.

President Premadasa had not only envisioned a system of a government with devolution of power to the village level but also developed a framework for its implementation as far back as 1967 (See "Peramaga Lakunu" by R. Premadasa, 1967, Dayawansa Jayabody Publishers). A parallel could be drawn between the communes of the cantons of Switzerland and the "village Parliament" proposed by him wherein, the natural and human resource of the village are utilised.

for economic and social development of the Corresponding village. Had there been an opportunity for the implementation of his ideal, the country could not only have saved the colossal expenditure on the provincial and divisional administrations but also the tragic losses from the war in the North.

Leaders

As such, the author urges the political leaders of the day to closely scrutinise the Premadsa proposals as an a model for a federal system in Sri Lanka compared with several other federal and confederal democracies (such as Australia, Canada, Germany, India), there is no justification whatsoever to institutionalise provincial or regional administrations to devolve power to the people. In an country with a population of only around 20 million and 65,000 square kilometres in extent, the Centre should have the institutional capacity and the management capability to ensure good governance and socio-economic development in direct interaction with the "village level administration".

National consensus should essentially be developed on the desirability of devolution of power, directly to the people, through the establishment of institutional mechanisms at "village level". The establishment of a direct link between the Centre and the village, bypassing the monstrous Provincial and Divisional administrations, will be a more effective path in the progress towards peace. It will help diffuse the ghastly political power struggles among politicians as well as corruption, nepotism and many other activities that ruin this nation.

Village level institutions could be de-politicised in a short period of time and mutual respect could be re-established among the people of different ethnic and religious communities. Similarly, affiliations among neighbouring village institutions, inhabited even by different ethnic communities could be encouraged and strengthened for mutual economic advantages and security. As such, the proposal could emerge as an essential tool for conflict management and bring normalcy to the nation ravaged by two decades of war. It could also address issues including intra-ethnic violence attributed to conflicting claims by political parties as "sole representatives" of their people.

De-politicisation at "village level parliaments" (communes) continues to thrive in Switzerland. "A-political groups" have been able to secure a considerable number of seats from the traditional political parties during the last decade. It is even more important to note the procedure adopted to minimise the capital expenditure of the management of communes.

Communes and cantons

There are 3,017 communes and 23 cantons, of which three are divided into half-cantons. The smallest political unit is the commune. The communes and the cantons provide their citizens with rights of political participation. The cantons exert a significant influence on political events in the Confederation.

Some communes are as large as Zurich, with over 400,000 inhabitants, others are very small, with fewer than 50 inhabitants. Its citizens determine the management of a commune. In smaller communes the communal assembly is held (even on a church-yard) for this purpose. It meets at regular intervals and makes decisions on local current affairs such as the budget, accounts, elections, etc. Swiss citizens permanently resident in the commune are entitled to vote. Executive authority is the local council elected at the community assembly and usually works on a part-time basis.

The communal assembly also elects a clerk (secretary, even a member from the parish) and other important officials such as the treasurer on a full-time basis. Teachers, too, are often elected at the community assembly. If the commune is too large, there is a communal parliament, elected among residents in the commune. Candidates for both communal level legislative and executive councils are usually put forward by the political parties. The sphere of autonomy of the communes, within which they can make decisions, is defined in the cantonal and/or communal laws.

The most important duties of the communes include: the school and welfare systems, traffic police, gas, electricity and water supplies, and, in urban communes, local public traffic. In cases where the towns extend into surrounding communes and other built-up areas, the communal authorities have to provide additional services. The residents of these urban communes enjoy the advantages of urban infrastructure (transport, roads, and cultural amenities) without having to pay the taxes for them. The neighbouring communes generally form administrative associations for facilities that cross communal borders, such as the construction and running of sewerage plants or refuse disposal plants.

Level

The next higher level of political unit is the urban district (Bezirk). It might be comparable to a municipality. Urban districts comprise several communes and are often the lowest units for courts. Cantonal administrative officers may also serve in urban districts. In the canton of Berne for instance, there is a government (lieutenant) in the urban district.

The Cantons, which are independent Republics, constitute important elements in the Swiss Confederation due to the historical fact that the Confederation, as well as the communes within their territory, were created by the cantons, with the adoption of the Constitution in 1848. In the national structure from bottom (commune) to top (Confederation), the cantons occupy an intermediary and hinge-type position. The significance of the cantons is, moreover, illustrated by the fact that a Swiss tends to feel that he is less of a Swiss than a citizen of a certain canton.

The Political institutions of the cantons are similar to those of the communes and the Confederation. The legislative power is exercised by a parliament elected by the people (known as the Cantonal Council) in collaboration with the people who express their will through referenda. The parliamentary elections work on a proportional system in the constituencies into which the canton is divided. Candidates are nominated by the political parties or by groups of voters.

The executive and administrative authorities are a Government Council (similar to the cabinet of ministers), elected by the people for a fixed term of office. Its President (equivalent to the Chief Minister of a Province) changes every year. There are always representatives of different parties in the cantonal governments. The members of the Council work in unison without division as government and opposition members. The cantonal administration is divided into several departments,which, depending on the size of the canton, are normally distributed as follows: internal administration, justice, police, military, finances, economic affairs, health, welfare, education and construction.

As regards courts, the cantons have a superior court of appeal (Tribunal) against decisions of the district courts. The assizes determine serious crimes. There are appeal courts (to hear pleas for annulment of sentences passed by the other lower courts). In addition there are commercial courts, the administration courts (settlement of disputes about taxes, official licenses, etc.).

The question to be asked is whether Sri Lanka, a unitary State, should agree to establish Regional Councils with the right of self-determination in its envisaged federal legislation. Sri Lanka is much smaller (both in area and population) when compared with Tamil Nadu, which is but a single Region (State) of India.

As such, future federal legislation could evolve by a direct devolution of power to the "village level (the equivalent of Communes of Switzerland). This arrangement will fulfil the aspirations of all peoples of all ethnic and religious groups. Mutual trust and respect will be enhanced among the communities of neighbouring villages. So-called representatives of the people at provincial and district level assemblies (parliaments or councils).

will become redundant and billions of Rupees could be saved by way of wages and many other incentives.

The confederation

The canton, as a political unit, exerts a formative influence on the Confederation. The Council of States, (the Federal Parliament) reflects the opinions of the cantons. Two members (the half-cantons by one member) represent each canton, regardless of its size or population, in the Council of the States. The Council of States together with the National Council constitutes the Federal Assembly. The Federal Council (the Cabinet of the Confederation) comprises of seven members elected by the Federal Assembly, from among four major political parties, for an average of ten years in office. The Presidency of the Council rotates among the seven members annually. Each councillor heads a Department (in fact, a ministry): viz. foreign affairs; internal affairs; justice and police; military; finance and customs; trade; and transport and energy.

There are 200 seats in the National Council and these are distributed in relation to the population of the cantons with at least one per canton or half-canton. At present there is one National Councillor for just over 30,000 residents. The cantons and half-cantons also form the constituencies. The Council of States (46 members) are elected in accordance with the cantonal law with two candidates - or one candidate for a half-canton. The members of the two Councils are elected for a period of four years.

Referenda are classical examples of Swiss direct democracy. The Swiss have the right to vote at the polls on amendments to the Federal Constitution and on a new or amended federal legislation. As distinct from other countries, Parliament does not create new laws but only submits them. It is the people that decide whether or not they be passed and implemented. Amendments to the Constitution passed by the Federal Assembly must be put to the people. A bill on the Constitution becomes legally binding only after it is ratified by a majority of the cantons.

(The author has been residing in Geneva since 1979, where he served in the Directorate of Occupational Safety and Health of the International Labour Organisation. He was also the Founder President of the Sri Lanka Association of Geneva and the Founder President of International Buddhist Foundation).

News | Business | Features | Editorial | Security
Politics | World | Letters | Sports | Obituaries |

Produced by Lake House
Copyright 2001 The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon Ltd.
Comments and suggestions to :Web Manager