US embassy cable - 05COLOMBO1216

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 COLOMBO 001216 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/13/2015 
TAGS: PGOV, PTER, PHUM, CE, Elections, Political Parties 
SUBJECT: CALLS FOR ELECTIONS AS THE UNP MARCHES THROUGH 
COLOMBO WHILE SUPREME COURT WRESTLES WITH P-TOMS 
 
REF: A. COLOMBO 1160 
 
     B. COLOMBO 1128 
 
Classified By: Amb. J. Lunstead for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 
 
---------------- 
SUMMARY 
---------------- 
 
1.    (U) As the opposition United National Party (UNP) 
concluded its 10-day Janbala Meheyuma (People's Power March) 
to Colombo on July 12, the party focused on pressuring the 
Commissioner of Elections Dayananda Dissanayake to call for 
Presidential elections this year (Ref A). Continued silence 
from Dissanayake has led to across-the-board speculation and 
confusion as to when a Presidential election is legally 
mandated.    Meanwhile, a three-member bench of the Supreme 
Court has indicated it will issue its decision on the 
legality of the Post-Tsunami Operating Mechanical Structure 
(P-TOMS) on Friday, July 15 in response to a fundamental 
rights case filed by the Marxist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna 
(JVP) party, a decision that is bound to be controversial 
regardless of its content. END SUMMARY. 
 
----------------- 
MARCH ON COLOMBO 
----------------- 
 
2.    (U) An estimated one to two hundred thousand persons 
joined the peaceful UNP march as it culminated in Colombo on 
July 12 (Ref A) amidst renewed calls to hold Presidential 
elections this year.  Calling for polls in late 2005, 
participants in the UNP March also pointed to the soaring 
cost of living expenses and numerous unfulfilled campaign 
promises of the current coalition government as other reasons 
for holding elections this year. (Comment: Surprisingly, the 
pending P-TOMS issue was not a significant component of the 
march. End Comment.) 
 
------------------- 
2005 OR 2006, ONLY 
TIME WILL TELL 
------------------- 
 
3.    (U) The UNP march appeared to be successful, because it 
kept the spotlight directly on the issue of when the next 
elections can or must be held.  The UNP claims that elections 
must be held in late 2005.  Legal opinion seems divided. 
(Comment:  Former President J.R. Jayawardene apparently set a 
precedent, when, after calling for and winning early 
elections in December 1982, he completed his second term in 
December 1988, six years from the date the early elections 
were held.  End Comment.) Shiral Lakthilaka, Senior Advisor 
at the Berghof Foundation for Conflict Studies told poloff 
that the President's second term technically began on 
February 4, 2000, the inauguration date immediately following 
the December 1999 elections.  As such, Lakthilaka noted, 
elections must be held in 2005, in order to inaugurate a new 
president by February 4, 2006. The President's supporters and 
other constitutional scholars on the other hand,  hold that 
President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga's second term 
did not start until November 2000, when her first term was 
initially due to end, thereby making November 2006 the 
appropriate date for the upcoming polls. 
 
 
4.    (C) Former Minister of Justice and Constitutional 
Affairs and current UNP member of Parliament G.L. Peiris, in 
a conversation with the Ambassador, admitted for the first 
time that the Constitution was indeed vague about when 
elections should be held.  Bar Council President Desmond 
Fernando--a UNP supporter--told the Ambassador he believes 
the President's term runs until the end of 2006.  If the 
Election Commissioner decides the election must be held this 
year, a decision must be issued soon, since he is required to 
call for polls 30 days prior to holding elections, and 
according to article 31(4) of the constitution, Presidential 
elections cannot occur less than one month and not more than 
two months before the expiration of the term.  Therefore, if 
elections are to be held this year, Dissanayake must make a 
statement to that effect between September 21 and October 21 
of this year. 
 
---------------- 
JVP VS.  P-TOMS 
---------------- 
 
5.    (U) Meanwhile on July 12, a three-member bench of the 
Supreme Court began hearing the fundamental rights case filed 
by the JVP on the legality of the P-TOMS agreement (Ref B). 
According to press reports, the JVP is seeking an injunction 
on the implementation of P-TOMS with regards to regional 
committees and regional funds governed by the committees, but 
not/not against the national committee or district 
committees.  Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva has said the 
Supreme Court will announce on Friday, July 15, whether it 
will grant interim relief to the petitioners, which would 
effectively stall the P-TOMS until a final decision is 
rendered. 
 
---------------- 
COMMENT 
---------------- 
 
6.    (C) In a May 2005 conversation with pol FSN, 
Dissanayake stated that he would not violate the Constitution 
and that he would call for elections "at the proper time." 
When that proper time is, however, remains unclear. 
Observers noting the tenor of the Court arguments so far have 
told us they believe the Court may grant interim relief. 
This would not only stall P-TOMS and create a gap where a 
mechanism needs to be in place to deliver tsunami relief to 
areas not under government control, but will also make an 
already unstable political situation even more so.  End 
Comment. 
LUNSTEAD