Yesterday’s landmark Supreme Court judgment on the next presidential poll date should be hailed by one and all. The learned judges of the apex court have, once and for all, healed a festering constitutional wound on the body politic, on which political maggots had been thriving for months. All credit to the JHU, which, when in doubt, went to court without trying to ‘march it out’! It has added a feather to its cap or, to contextualize it a little, a flower to its malwattiya.

The other parties to the dispute tried different methods to cut the constitutional Gordian knot. The government resorted to evasion and the UNP to coercion. Many were the constitutional experts who treated us ad nauseam to a plethora of opinions on the matter. From eminent lawyers to humble fishmongers, opinions were being expressed. The political windbags made the biggest noise. Some of them could be heard bragging that the President would go on till next year, while others went all out to oust her through people power. Interestingly, many of the charlatans posing as constitutional experts didn’t know the Constitution from the Highway Code! They were just viewing the dispute through political prisms of their choice, feigning objectivity.

The poor Elections Commissioner, who is not in good heath, underwent the same suffering as the poor baby in the Caucasian Chalk Circle. He was almost torn apart by the government and the UNP over the disputed date. The media did no better. It kept bombarding him with questions, which the seasoned mandarin ducked adroitly with a smile.

But for the JHU’s decision to evoke the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which alone is empowered to determine the constitutional matters that give rise to doubt and confusion, the dispute would certainly have developed into an unwanted crisis. This achievement of the JHU wouldn’t have been possible through a death fast. Remember Ven. Dr. Sobhitha’s fast against P-TOMS? The JHU, which Ms. Kumaratunga took for a presidential ride over the P-TOMS, apparently, resorted to a legal tit for political tat.

The thrust of the argument for a presidential election in 2005, was that President Kumaratunga had been sworn in for the second term in December 1999 and as such the next election should be held after a lapse of six years from that time. Lieutenants of the President held that the oath in question had been a counter to the propaganda campaign by her political foes, mainly the UNP, which claimed that she was not physically fit to hold office after the assassination attempt. By coming before the public and taking the oath, they claimed, she had sought to refute the claim of her opponents. A claim of a second oath taken subsequently was also being flaunted. It is sad that the fallout of the LTTE’s barbarous act later became ammunition in the hands of her political opponents.

Celebrations were on in the streets following the announcement of the judgment, though nobody knew who was going to be the winner. The question that needs to be asked is whether the people will be the winners, whoever is going to win the election. We have our doubts. The executive presidency is the bane of Sri Lanka politics. We as a nation have proved beyond an iota of doubt that we are not mature enough to have such a powerful institution. Put anyone behind a counter, Albert Camus has said, he becomes all important in no time. What happens to an ambitious politician, when he or she is put in the executive presidential seat, goes without saying. It is a kind of machine into which we put democrats and take dictators out. We are going to do so in a few months time, once again—faute de mieux, of course! Abolition of the executive presidency as well as making the head of state answerable to Parliament is a prerequisite for safeguarding the democratic rights of the people. Those who are disporting themselves in celebrations today may be the very ones who will face water cannon, rubber bullets, tear gas and baton charges in the future.

There are obviously some who are disappointed and resentful over their captain’s innings being brought to, in their opinion, an abrupt end. Like in cricket, they should be told, in politics, too, DuckworthLewis like methods are called for, in extraordinary situations. They have no alternative but to console themselves and hope for a better innings with a new player. All good things, as is the way with this mundane world, come to an end. So do bad things, too. And whether it is good things or bad things that have come to an end, only time will tell.

Three hearty cheers to the judgment!