Merits and Demerits of the Executive Presidency in Sri Lanka

There are many political systems in the world. The political system of Sri Lanka, which was subjected to numerous changes since the independence ranging from socialism to neo-liberalism, reflected the mindset of the politicians who were doubtful as to what should be the system to govern Sri Lankans. One of the most controversial changes happened to Sri Lankan politics was the introduction of the post of Executive Presidency. By being the supreme leader who holds the reins of both the state and the government, he has enormous power vested in him. There is an ongoing debate on the role of citizenry in an executive presidential system.

The second republican constitution had introduced the executive presidency to Sri Lanka. It was mainly adopted from the executive of France and the United States. Late president Jayawardena was expecting a strong unbound leadership who can make firm decisions to bring the country to prosperity. It also came as an answer for the political instability plaguing the country.

Sri Lankan executive president is both the chief of the state and the leader of the government. Although according to the constitution, he is responsible for only the executive powers, indirectly he is like a giant octopus whose tentacles spread all over the executive, legislature and judiciary of the country. He is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, the leader of the cabinet and the supreme authority who shapes the foreign policy.

Every countryneeds a strong leadership who can take quick and firm decisions. That need is more prominent in developing countries like Sri Lanka. When the decision makers of the country engaged with bitter rivalry and prone to interference from partisan politics and political pressure groups, opportunities to take unpopular decisions which give benefits in the long run will be lost. In emergency situations, executive presidential powers will decide whether the country survives or falls into anarchy.United States and France are good examples that show how executive presidency can steer a country in a stable and progressive way.

With great power comes great responsibility. The main hitch in executive presidency is the possibility of the president becoming corrupted by the power. That’s why although most of the presidential candidates come to power by promising to abolish the executive presidency, when they get elected, try to secure more and more powers without adhering to their promise.Appointing family members to important administrative positions, politicization of the civil service, corruptions, interfering with the judiciary are some of the immediate consequences of the executive acting like a dictator.

A country needs a leader who is accountable to people. Absolute power in governing a country should never be given to a person without proper methods to control them. In conclusion I believe in the need of a more controlled and accountable executive for our country.