20A: You only vote twice

20A: You only vote twice

The Bill on the 20th Amendment to the Constitution has been so controversial that the Joint Opposition is said to have planned a “mass cross over” from the Government to the
Opposition, when it is taken for debate in Parliament this week as scheduled. However, it is reported that the Government has deferred its debate.

Whatever the veracity of the reports on the crossovers was, the essence of this piece of legislation is very important in terms of democracy, as it is mainly meant for the conducting of elections for all nine Provincial Councils on the same day.

However, other legal effects of the Bill are in fact highly contentious in the eyes of the Provincial Councils.

The Government also mulls to do away with the current Proportional Representation (PR) system and replace it with a mixed electoral system in respect of Parliament and Provincial Council elections through some other Acts. Monday’s Daily Mirror had carried two statements from President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe to this effect. Already laws have been amended for the Local Government elections to be held under the mixed electoral system.

We have the experience of holding countrywide elections in one day as well as on a staggered basis. Parliament elections are being held on a particular day specified by the Elections Commission or the previous Elections Department, while the Provincial Council elections and the Local Government elections are being held normally on a staggered basis. Before 1960 the Parliamentary elections too had been held in various stages.

The disadvantages of holding elections in stages or on a staggered basis are long debated. During the ongoing debate over the 20th Amendment, not a single person had argued against holding elections for any of the three levels of people’s representation - Parliament, Provincial Councils or Local Government bodies– on a single day.

It is an oft -stated fact that holding of elections for Provincial Councils or Local Government bodies hikes up the burden not only on the public coffers but also on the political parties contesting at those elections.

Apart from that, it carries with it a huge impact on the objective of democracy as the results of one phase of an election would definitely influence the voters, who would vote in the subsequent phases of the same election.

In India the election for the Lok Sabha (Parliament) is held on staggered basis but the results of all stages of polling are announced only at the end of the election. However, even then, there is a possibility of voter behaviour during the initial stages of the election being an indication of the results of those stages and thereby having a bearing on the voter, casting his/her vote at the subsequent stages.

Needless to say, elections for some or all Provincial Councils would have to either be postponed or advanced, if elections for all Provincial Councils are to be held on the same day.

Hence, it is hilarious in this case to argue, as some groups had done, that franchise of the people would be violated by postponing elections or rights of the members of the Provincial Councils elected by the people for a full term are violated by advancing the election dates of those councils.

Leaders of the Opposition in the Parliament and the Provincial Councils must be more responsible not to be hell-bent on defeating the Bill in toto without attempting to remove the other contentious sections, in order to embarrass the Government.

On the other hand it is also pertinent for the Government to be amenable to remove the sections that are likely to go against the spirit of devolution such as those on transferring some of the powers of Provincial Councils and the Provincial Governors to Parliament.

It is good to have an open dialogue on this matter between the two sides of the political divide, outside Parliament first.