I was quite impressed by reading the two feature articles on "The Donoughmore-type Executive Committee System" and "Electoral Reforms" written by Rev. Fr. (Dr.) Oswald Firth/Mr. Richard A. Dias and Mr. K. Godage respectively, in your last Sunday edition. Since both articles highlighted the need for a change in the present system of Governance and drew the attention of the civil society at large, I too felt like making a few comments as a so called ‘sovereign -voter’!

At the outset, the readers will recall my full page feature article headlined "Towards a political solution: Extend PR system to Cabinet and abolish Preference Vote" published in the Sunday Island of 20th July 2008.I doubt whether the eminent writers had the opportunity of reading it. Be that as it may, we as decent, right thinking and peace loving citizens of this country, yearn to see the existing, distorted political administration system of ‘Confrontational politics’ replaced by a system of ‘Consensual politics’- a system that breeds no political rivalry; a system that is fair and equitable; and also a system that is cost-effective and productive leading to a prosperous Sri Lanka.

I have in my article proposed some changes to the present constitution in keeping with Mr. Godage’s oft quoted phrase that ‘one should not throw the baby with the bath water’ as we have done to the Donoughmore system!

In making my proposals, I was guided by the following underlying principles in order to achieve the voter expectations. I would kindly request those interested, to read the ensuing paragraphs in conjunction with my letter under reference.

1) Process of electing People’s Representatives( MPs) to the Central Parliament

The very concept of electing representatives to the national Legislature or the Parliament through voter franchise, demands that the system should be fundamentally ‘fair and equitable’. Thus, one should recognize that every valid vote cast by a person at such election is equal in value, whether it is cast in the South, North, East or the West. Ideally, the entire country should be voting as one electorate to elect representatives to the Central Parliament, as the voter is required to decide only on the national policy framework (Manifesto) put forward by the respective contesting parties to develop the country as a whole. It should be so, because we already have a decentralized, political administration system consisting of Provincial councils, Municipalities, Urban Councils and Pradeshiya Sabahs where again members are elected by the public vote, purely to look after their peripheral, local needs Thus, the latter are the people whom the voters should (if at all) care to know to get their needs met and not the MPs whose main responsibilities revolve around Law making and the Finances of the country. (This aspect is discussed in detail in my article under reference) I am indeed at a loss to understand why some of our academics and wise men still harp on the MPs as ‘Demi-Gods’ whom they should know to get their things done!

 Under the First- past- the post or the Westminster system, the MPs were elected by the people voting from small electorates of unequal populations thereby distorting the people’s verdict vis-à-vis National Policy Framework. The 1977 election result which glaringly exposed the shortcomings of that system, paved the way for the better and fairer PR system (Later, of course corrupted by the introduction of the preference vote and the opportunity given to MPs to cross over!) with the much larger District as the electoral unit. It is admitted that no voting system can be perfect, for in the first place, it is not mandatory and in the second place, the decision of the voters spanning an age profile of 18 to 80, anyway cannot be construed as logical and intelligent all the time, as they are susceptible to political rhetoric, high propaganda and a multitude of other petty considerations! The adverse effect of the non-mandatory nature of the system can be so glaring that if the non-voting and the rejected vote percentages are reckoned, the real verdict of the people would obliterate the achieved result! In this context, the original PR system has no doubt attempted to make the outcome as fair and equitable as possible by having additional mechanisms such as bonus seats, Party list system (now dispensed with) and National list system.

In my view, it is after ensuring that a ‘fair and equitable’ voting system is in place, that we should discuss the structure or the type of governance that we desire to have. I commend the views expressed by the writers in regard to the type of Governance. Here again, my attempt was not to’ throw the baby with the bath water’ but to make the Cabinet of Ministers, an’ All Party Cabinet’ by proposing to apply the PR arithmetic (used to select National list MPs) to elect members to the Cabinet so that after the elections, all citizens including the politicians will have to forget their party rivalries and forge ahead as one Nation at least till the next elections in 06 years time!

Since our broad economic, social, cultural and foreign policies are now very much in place due to the globalization phenomenon , we would at most be electing the party who in our opinion can effectively steer the country forward , bearing in mind that the Cabinet of Ministers will still be an all party one! In the present context of already having a mixed Cabinet, the proposal would not even rank as a paradigm shift, and it would eventually turn out to be a routine, six yearly exercises, sans fanfare and extravaganza which a developing country like ours can ill afford. This proposal conforms to the spirit of the’ Executive Committees’ under the Donoughmore system. Well, I have no qualms about re-adopting the ‘Executive Committee’ system except that we have to go for more fundamental changes such as abolition of the Executive Presidency and tolerate time consuming, decision making procedures inherent in Executive Committees.

As stated in my article under reference, the Executive Presidency is good for a developing country like ours, so long as the elected President functions solely as a `Statesman’ without any political bias or affiliations during his stewardship of six years. If the concept of having the Executive Presidency, Legislature and the Judiciary as three independent Institutions is to be implemented in its true spirit, the Presidential elections should ideally be contested by non-political, independent candidates conforming to a specific set of eligibility criteria. If a cost reduction is desired both elections can be held on the same day after educating the voter adequately!

In conclusion, I wish to state for the benefit of the readers that my aforesaid article also discusses solutions to related areas such as Executive Presidency, Decentralized levels of administration, Role of MPs, Preferential vote and Party lists, with a view to rectifying the existing distortions and aberrations forced in to the PR system for sheer political expediency!