The Supreme Court (SC), on Tuesday (29), suspended the former United National Front (UNF)-led Government’s Cabinet of Ministers’ decision to provide a house down Paget Road in Colombo 7 to incumbent Government Parliamentarian and former President Maithripala Sirisena, a decision taken when Sirisena was the Head of the Government and thereby, the Cabinet. The SC had further stated that the interim order pertaining to the said suspension will remain in effect until the duration of the hearing of the petition.
This decision was issued in response to a fundamental rights (FR) application filed by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) and CPA Executive Director Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu challenging the cabinet decision to give the house which Sirisena was using as the President and to cover the costs associated with him using the said house. It was also argued that the allocation of the said house, which the petitioners claim is a public asset of great financial value and therefore a valuable asset of the country, for the personal use of a former President who no longer carries out the functions of a Head of State and Government is irrational, arbitrary, and illegal, and that it was wrong for the Cabinet to decide on the benefits of a retiring President before he ceased to hold office.
According to the law, former Presidents are entitled to an official residence, security detail (depending on the requirement), and a pension, and former Presidents Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga and Mahinda Rajapaksa, and former President Ranasinghe Premadasa’s widow Hema Premadasa, too have been given official residences. The Presidents Entitlements Act No. 4 of 1986 states that every former President or the widow of a former President, during his or her lifetime, is entitled to use an appropriate residence free of rent, and that in the event such an appropriate residence is not provided for any reason, is entitled to a monthly allowance equivalent to one-third of the former President’s monthly pension.
The decision to award Sirisena an official residence was taken back in October 2019, just a few months before retirement from the presidential office, while he was serving as the President. Many criticised this move, especially owing to the said residence being said to have been renovated at a cost of Rs. 180 million from public funds, and there was severe opposition from Opposition parties as well.
The biggest reason for this criticism was the fact that the Cabinet made this decision while Sirisena was serving as the President, which makes him the Head of the Cabinet, which amounts to a conflict of interest and is therefore unethical. In fact, allocating and/or getting cabinet approval while holding presidential office, for state properties to be used post retirement, sets a bad precedent for future Presidents.
Politicians and high-ranking public officials using state properties that have not been allocated for personal, off-duty use as their own is not a new trend, and such figures from the top level of the Government to the grassroots level can be seen doing so. In fact, certain public officials taking their official vehicles home after retirement was revealed before the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) as well.
If public representatives continue to feel that a President deserves a permanent residence at the cost of public funds for the service that they have rendered and if the people too feel the same, or, if a former President is not in a position to afford to spend for a residence due to financial difficulties, that is another story. The fact of the matter is, even though Presidents are Heads of State, they are still public representatives, who were elected for the purpose of serving the people, and therefore, it is adequate to provide them with perks such as official residences to be used during the tenure, along with a security detail and monetary benefits, or any other benefit depending on circumstances. If Presidents are seen as those deserving lifetime residences, steps can be taken to give them houses under strict rules, limited to only a certain value, and to avoid the unacceptable use of public funds to give houses in the most prestigious residential area in Sri Lanka (i.e. Colombo 7) to every President.
Most importantly, decisions regarding awarding perks for a President should not be made by the Cabinet alone as it represents only the governing party or coalition, which is merely a fraction of all public representatives. Such perks concern public funds, and therefore, all public representatives should have a say in such matters. Therefore, essentially, such decisions must be made by the Parliament, which represents the general public, and not just a party or a segment of the public representatives.
The SC can take a decision only on the basis of what the existing laws or policies specify, and policy decisions to streamline or curtail this policy of affording houses to Presidents upon leaving office must be taken by the Parliament. Even though these lavish perks are often given by those at higher levels of the Government or by those who themselves benefit from such, there should be some involvement of members other than those representing the governing party or coalition.
Otherwise, every President will be freely allocating state properties for themselves, citing services people have not benefited from, and Colombo 7 could become a retirement town for former Presidents.The roof over an ex-President’s head
30 Mar 2022
The roof over an ex-President’s head
30 Mar 2022
The Supreme Court (SC), on Tuesday (29), suspended the former United National Front (UNF)-led Government’s Cabinet of Ministers’ decision to provide a house down Paget Road in Colombo 7 to incumbent Government Parliamentarian and former President Maithripala Sirisena, a decision taken when Sirisena was the Head of the Government and thereby, the Cabinet. The SC had further stated that the interim order pertaining to the said suspension will remain in effect until the duration of the hearing of the petition.
This decision was issued in response to a fundamental rights (FR) application filed by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) and CPA Executive Director Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu challenging the cabinet decision to give the house which Sirisena was using as the President and to cover the costs associated with him using the said house. It was also argued that the allocation of the said house, which the petitioners claim is a public asset of great financial value and therefore a valuable asset of the country, for the personal use of a former President who no longer carries out the functions of a Head of State and Government is irrational, arbitrary, and illegal, and that it was wrong for the Cabinet to decide on the benefits of a retiring President before he ceased to hold office.
According to the law, former Presidents are entitled to an official residence, security detail (depending on the requirement), and a pension, and former Presidents Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga and Mahinda Rajapaksa, and former President Ranasinghe Premadasa’s widow Hema Premadasa, too have been given official residences. The Presidents Entitlements Act No. 4 of 1986 states that every former President or the widow of a former President, during his or her lifetime, is entitled to use an appropriate residence free of rent, and that in the event such an appropriate residence is not provided for any reason, is entitled to a monthly allowance equivalent to one-third of the former President’s monthly pension.
The decision to award Sirisena an official residence was taken back in October 2019, just a few months before retirement from the presidential office, while he was serving as the President. Many criticised this move, especially owing to the said residence being said to have been renovated at a cost of Rs. 180 million from public funds, and there was severe opposition from Opposition parties as well.
The biggest reason for this criticism was the fact that the Cabinet made this decision while Sirisena was serving as the President, which makes him the Head of the Cabinet, which amounts to a conflict of interest and is therefore unethical. In fact, allocating and/or getting cabinet approval while holding presidential office, for state properties to be used post retirement, sets a bad precedent for future Presidents.
Politicians and high-ranking public officials using state properties that have not been allocated for personal, off-duty use as their own is not a new trend, and such figures from the top level of the Government to the grassroots level can be seen doing so. In fact, certain public officials taking their official vehicles home after retirement was revealed before the Committee on Public Enterprises (COPE) as well.
If public representatives continue to feel that a President deserves a permanent residence at the cost of public funds for the service that they have rendered and if the people too feel the same, or, if a former President is not in a position to afford to spend for a residence due to financial difficulties, that is another story. The fact of the matter is, even though Presidents are Heads of State, they are still public representatives, who were elected for the purpose of serving the people, and therefore, it is adequate to provide them with perks such as official residences to be used during the tenure, along with a security detail and monetary benefits, or any other benefit depending on circumstances. If Presidents are seen as those deserving lifetime residences, steps can be taken to give them houses under strict rules, limited to only a certain value, and to avoid the unacceptable use of public funds to give houses in the most prestigious residential area in Sri Lanka (i.e. Colombo 7) to every President.
Most importantly, decisions regarding awarding perks for a President should not be made by the Cabinet alone as it represents only the governing party or coalition, which is merely a fraction of all public representatives. Such perks concern public funds, and therefore, all public representatives should have a say in such matters. Therefore, essentially, such decisions must be made by the Parliament, which represents the general public, and not just a party or a segment of the public representatives.
The SC can take a decision only on the basis of what the existing laws or policies specify, and policy decisions to streamline or curtail this policy of affording houses to Presidents upon leaving office must be taken by the Parliament. Even though these lavish perks are often given by those at higher levels of the Government or by those who themselves benefit from such, there should be some involvement of members other than those representing the governing party or coalition.
Otherwise, every President will be freely allocating state properties for themselves, citing services people have not benefited from, and Colombo 7 could become a retirement town for former Presidents.Kapruka
Discover Kapruka, the leading online shopping platform in Sri Lanka, where you can conveniently send Gifts and Flowers to your loved ones for any event. Explore a wide range of popular Shopping Categories on Kapruka, including Toys, Groceries, Electronics, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Automobile, Mother and Baby Products, Clothing, and Fashion. Additionally, Kapruka offers unique online services like Money Remittance, Astrology, Medicine Delivery, and access to over 700 Top Brands. Also If you’re interested in selling with Kapruka, Partner Central by Kapruka is the best solution to start with. Moreover, through Kapruka Global Shop, you can also enjoy the convenience of purchasing products from renowned platforms like Amazon and eBay and have them delivered to Sri Lanka.Send love straight to their heart this Valentine's with our thoughtful gifts!
Discover Kapruka, the leading online shopping platform in Sri Lanka, where you can conveniently send Gifts and Flowers to your loved ones for any event. Explore a wide range of popular Shopping Categories on Kapruka, including Toys, Groceries, Electronics, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Automobile, Mother and Baby Products, Clothing, and Fashion. Additionally, Kapruka offers unique online services like Money Remittance, Astrology, Medicine Delivery, and access to over 700 Top Brands. Also If you’re interested in selling with Kapruka, Partner Central by Kapruka is the best solution to start with. Moreover, through Kapruka Global Shop, you can also enjoy the convenience of purchasing products from renowned platforms like Amazon and eBay and have them delivered to Sri Lanka.Send love straight to their heart this Valentine's with our thoughtful gifts!