Proceeding with a ‘people friendly’ constitution-making process

The President’s assurance to deliver a ‘People friendly’ Constitution and an article in the press captioned ‘Constitution-making process’ prompted me as a senior citizen cum sovereign voter to pen a transparent procedure as follows, to ensure public/voter participation in ‘People friendly Constitution making’, using the chapter dedicated to ‘Franchise and Electoral Reforms’ under the proposed new Constitution as an example.

It is public knowledge that initially in 2020, an Eminent Lawyers Committee appointed by the Cabinet was required to submit a draft report on the proposed New Constitution. Thereafter, in 2021 a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) of 14 MPs was appointed to identify appropriate reforms for Sri Lanka’s election laws and electoral system. Both Committees invited proposals from the public. However, past experience shows that such committees with a few members are not geared to handle large numbers of public proposals effectively.

In the wake of the President’s latest assurance to, deliver a ‘People friendly’ Constitution, the writer wishes to propose a rational and transparent method to produce such a Constitution using its relevant chapter- ‘Franchise and Electoral Reforms’ as an example.

A transparent method to produce a ‘People friendly’ Constitution

1) As has already been proposed, the President on the advice of the Independent National Elections Commission (NEC) shall set up a Permanent Civilian task force for ‘Electoral Reforms’ comprising, NEC recommended eminent retired judges and the academia possessing the requisite expert knowledge together with, ‘Sovereign voter dedicated’ organisations (like 'Paffrel', CaFFe, CMEV) and other concerned civil rights organisations and activists with practical knowledge as its members. Since matters such as eligibility criteria, selection, nomination procedure and allocation of seats for MPs are some of the crucial aspects in electoral reforms, they would fundamentally be barred from membership in this task force owing to the obvious ‘conflict of interest’.

2) The Task force shall study the relevant section of the ‘Expert Draft Report’ submitted through the President and also the Report of the Parliamentary Select Committee and prepare its own Draft to be included under the relevant chapter‘ Franchise and Electoral Reforms’ and submit to NEC.

3) The NEC in turn will vet the Draft and in keeping with the principles of ‘People based Governance’, place its own Draft before the people through the mass media in all three languages for their final comments and clearance within a specified time frame.

4) Thereafter, the NEC will consider the proposals and comments from the public and prepare the final draft and submit same to the Supreme Courts for clearance.

5) The same final Draft together with comments/recommendations of the Supreme Courts shall be sent to Legal Draftsman for preparation of the relevant section in the new Constitution. 6) Considering the potential for so called ‘slips’ occuring between the ‘cup and the lip’, at different levels, the Final Draft of the section prepared by the Legal Draftsman should be placed before the people again through the mass media for their final comments, if any, within a specific time frame. 7) Thereafter, the final document should be placed before the Parliament through the Cabinet solely for formal approval and thereafter, if necessary, go for a ‘Referendum’ on the recommendation of Supreme Courts.

The writer finally proposes that the above transparent method be followed in respect of all other relevant Chapters of the New Constitution within specified time frames to ensure facilitation of a ‘People friendly’ Constitution of their own making.

As a ‘spin-off ’ of this transparent exercise, the people and the politicians themselves will become more conscious and aware of the basic law of the country too.

Bernard Fernando

Moratuwa