Leader of opposition Sajith Premadasa stages a protest against the 20th Amendment to the Sri Lanka Constitution. Photo: Saroj Pathirana / Twitter
Leader of opposition Sajith Premadasa stages a protest against the 20th Amendment to the Sri Lanka Constitution. Photo: Saroj Pathirana / Twitter

Sri Lanka’s constitutional ping-pong

The 20th Amendment in historical perspective.

Dinesha Samararatne is a law academic with an interest in public law in Sri Lanka, including constitutional law.

Published on

On 22 September 2020, Sri Lanka's Justice Minister tabled the 20th Amendment to the Constitution in Parliament despite protests by members of the opposition. What does the proposed 20th Amendment to the Sri Lankan constitution mean for constitutional governance in Sri Lanka? What objectives does it seek to achieve? How should citizens understand the amendment in the context of Sri Lanka's history of constitutional governance?

The 20th Amendment, I argue, is best understood in light of the 17th (2001), 18th (2010) and 19th (2015) Amendments. The country's history of constitutional reform exposes how different governments and political parties have exploited representative democracy to consolidate political power. A historical perspective also allows citizens to appreciate both the impact of this amendment on accountability and their own role in strengthening and protecting constitutional governance in Sri Lanka. Unless Sri Lanka's citizens reclaim representative democracy from political parties and its charismatic leaders, the rally of constitutional ping pong in Sri Lanka will, most likely, continue.

Loading content, please wait...
Himal Southasian
www.himalmag.com