ON CHANGING CONSTITUTIONS

Sri Lankans love constitutional change with a passion, and so it seems we have the latest outpouring of calls for change of the constitutional document, and the President has also now indicated that he is receptive, with the announcement that there is an intention to appoint a Parliamentary Select Committee to look into the issue of a brand new core legislative document, that is a repository of the people's sovereign aspiration.

It would be remembered that J. R. Jayewardene also changed the constitution after a rather cursory PSC process in 1978. There was no constituent assembly for him; he claimed that the people had voted for a new constitution by granting him a five-sixths majority, after he had made the promise of constitutional change a part of his platform in the 1977 election.

But, as one erudite political columnist points out, there is a tendency to see the presidential system as the fountainhead of all evil even if this is not so, and this fact is made obvious by perusing the country's history which indicates that former Prime Ministers abused the powers of their office with almost greater tyrannical zeal than the Presidents that were to follow!

This is obvious from any perusal of recent history - Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike added two years to her term of office for no apparent reason, and she presided over a period of draconian state control in which properties were confiscated and the right to do business was parceled out to monopolies. It is strange that people have very short memories with regard to these times; it's either that, or they pretend that they have not learnt the lessons of history!

The presidential system of government was introduced with some purpose, and it is unwise to strip it of all its positive attributes merely on the strength of the fact that there are some jackal cries for reform, that are at least in part due to opposition hysteria stemming from fact that no redemption is seen in sight for any of the ineffectual political forces within its ranks.

Some would say that the danger in this constitution is that it carries with it a risk of some future tyrant in the making using of its rather ample provisions to perpetuate his or her rule to convert our democracy into a complete undiluted dictatorship. But on the other hand, this constitution's positives which include the considerable attribute of stability of regimes, and enabling strong leadership, makes the risk of future dangers worth taking, some would think.

Lee Kwan Yew the former ruler of Singapore, was interviewed in the latest issue of Time magazine, incidentally, and as an introduction, the Time writer states that Lee will be remembered for moulding Singapore in his own severe image, and taking away civil liberties on matters as trivial as chewing gum -- and as important as expressing dissent.

But, the point cannot be missed. They are talking about Lee because he was a man that delivered the goods. He was a transformative force, that reshaped Singapore's destiny and brought it from backwater to the status of regional trade hub.

He symbolizes what can be achieved through a correct mix of resoluteness and a benign form of strongmanship. The intellectuals may argue that we cannot have a dose of Lee here in this country, because we have all along been a democracy and cannot tolerate Lee style totalitarianism, and of course they are right.

But we can have a healthy bit of Lee within a democratic framework, and this is what can be achieved through the presidential system, which was the device by which the framer of the 1978 constitution J. R. Jayewardene in fact wanted to make this island another Singapore.

Happily, no matter what is said about constitutional reform, nobody will want a re-visitation to a period in which anarchic forces took over, and the land was overrun by rapacious foreign dominated buccaneers. After decades, Sri Lanka has come into its own, and nobody in their right mind would want to reverse these post-war gains.

Constitutional change of course can soften the hard edges, and the sore points in our constitutional document, and bring in some reason where it's necessary, but it is hoped that a strong presidency stays intact at least until this country realizes its true economic potential.