The recent landmark decision by the Supreme Court to uphold action taken by the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress (SLMC) to revoke the party membership of current Environment Minister Naseer Ahamed has sent a shockwave amongst politicians, as a long standing part of Sri Lanka’s degenerative political culture has now been called out. 

The Supreme Court in its ruling with regard to a petition filed by Ahamed challenging the SLMC’s decision to expel him from the party, deemed the SLMC’s decision as “valid and lawful”. The SLMC’s pronouncement to expel Ahamed, who was also the party’s Deputy Leader, came after he had voted in favour of the third reading of the Budget for the year 2022, in December 2021. He had since been working in support of both the Governments led by Rajapaksa and incumbent President Ranil Wickremesinghe. The SLMC’s relevant hierarchy had then decided to revoke Ahamed’s party membership.

The ruling by the Supreme Court has now opened a can of worms for the swing-wine bound politicians about their actions, and whatever they planned for the elections around the bend. There are several Members of Parliament who crossed over from the opposition to the Government, and vice versa. There are also other MP’s who left their political parties and currently function as “independent” MPs. What impact this ruling has on such members remains to be seen.

Since the 1990’s ‘cross-over politics’ has seen policy making and implementation suffer at the hands of greedy politicians who are often more interested in securing portfolios and benefits, rather than representing their party policies which the electoral base has voted for. Despite criticism of those who engage in crossover politics for disregarding the wishes of the voters who elected them and the policies on which they were elected, crossovers have been commonsight in the country’s political landscape.The corrosive nature of such politics, often make it impossible for robust policies to be adopted, and implemented through Parliament. The “swing” effect has derailed many plans for reforms and accountability in the past. It has also been used to secure votes for reckless and dangerous bills and amendments to the constitution.

For example, one Member of Parliament, who was once a sports minister and then the Minister in charge of Higher Education, who his constituents have been sending back to hold office, contested recently from the Nuwara Eliya District under the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP). He first contested the 1989 General Election under the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and then crossed over to the United National Party (UNP) in 2001 before returning to the SLFP-led United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) in 2010. As such, no one knows which policies he stands for or not. It seems such politicians are only interested in securing their futures, through accessing a portfolio and remaining on the side that ‘is in power’. This shameless culture of politics also holds a mirror to the voter landscape. How fickle many voters can be to return such persons to office is also a question which Sri Lankans should ask themselves.

Yesterday, Agriculture Minister Mahinda Amaraweera said that a number of Parliamentarians who had crossed over during the last two years are now in shock over the Supreme Court ruling. Amaraweera said addressing the media. Amaraweera lost his membership of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) for supporting the Government and accepting a ministerial portfolio. The Agriculture Minister also said that the ruling would act as a deterrent against such cross-over politics. “Due to this ruling, those who were about to switch their parties are scared. They will think about it not twice but several times.”

Hopefully, this verdict will trigger a change in the existing political culture landscape, by making those who “swing” from one set of policies to another, with callous disregard for the mandate they have been given, would think twice about it. Hopefully it will prevent such from happening again. However, the real change will only come when the voters cast their ballot for – what works best for the nation, or which policies will work best, and not based on petty or populist politics.