- Tweeter
republish
Rally of support, this Sunday, October 28, 2018, in front of the official residence of the sacked Prime Minister, in Colombo. REUTERS / Dinuka Liyanawatte
One man was killed and two others were shot on Sunday in Sri Lanka. These are the first victims of the political crisis that has shaken the country for three days. Did President Sirisena have the right to dismiss his prime minister and appoint the former strongman of the country instead? The debate is raging. Institutions are paralyzed. Two camps oppose each other. The former and the new head of government claim the exercise of power. For the first time, Sunday, the head of state took the floor to justify his action.
Right in his boots Maithripana Sirisena ensures that this appointment fully respects the Constitution. I decided it, he said, after consulting a team of lawyers. Neither the ousting of the Prime Minister nor the appointment of his successor are unconstitutional.
This is his version of the story, contradicted by the Sri Lankan lawyer Luwie Niranjan: " Before 2015, the Constitution provided that the president can dismiss the Prime Minister at any time. These provisions were removed in 2015, explains the lawyer. Today, the president no longer has the power to dismiss the prime minister. I would add that the Constitution allows the president to consult the Supreme Court if he so wishes. So if he had wanted to be sure that his action was legal, he could have consulted the Supreme Court. "
Second key question: why suspend Parliament until 16 November? No answer on this subject while it is the heart of the political battle. To silence members is to prevent the outgoing leader from proving that he still has a majority.
This is why Ranil Wickremesinghe refuses to leave office and speaks of " institutional coup ". He barricaded himself in the Prime Minister's official residence, in the heart of the Sri Lankan capital, surrounded by a thousand of his followers.