Sirisena seeks Supreme Court's opinion for six-year term
Colombo: In an unusual move, Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena has sought the Supreme Court's opinion if he could be the president for six years, a request which contradicts the amendment he introduced to reduce the presidential term to five years.
Sirisena, 66, spearheaded the 19th amendment (19A) to the Constitution in 2015 to prune the presidential term from six to five years.
The president's term should end in 2020, but has sought the Supreme Court's opinion if he could continue until 2021.
The Registrar of the Supreme Court yesterday informed the members of legal fraternity that the consideration by the apex Court has been listed for January 11, officials said.
It said the President had requested an opinion which read, "whether in terms of provisions of the Constitution, I as the person elected and succeeding to the office of President and having assumed such office in terms of Article 32 (1) of the Constitution on January 9, 2015, have any impediment to continue in the office of President for a period of 6 years from January 9, 2015".
The request stands in direct contrast to Sirisena's action of backing the civil society's demand to abolish the presidency when he offered to be the Opposition's common candidate in 2015.
Instead of abolishing it, Sirisena introduced the 19A amendment which reduced the presidential term to five years while taking away the absolute control over the dissolution of parliament.
Sirisena's announcement has come amidst the ongoing differences with his coalition partner, the United National Party (UNP) which is headed by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe, Sirisena's main backer in the 2015 election against former President Mahinda Rajapaksa.
Sirisena defeated Rajapaksa with a clear reform agenda in 2015.
The President of late has criticised the UNP publicly and some party members have also been critical of him.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Inappropriate for MLAs seeking free IPL tickets, says D.K. Suresh
Bengaluru: Bengaluru Milk Union Ltd President D.K. Suresh on Monday said it is inappropriate for MLAs to seek free IPL tickets, adding that those interested in watching matches should pay for them personally.
Speaking to reporters near his residence in Sadashivanagar, he said, “IPL is a commercial tournament and does not represent the country. It is not right for public representatives to focus too much on such matters.”
Referring to the recent controversy during the RCB celebrations, he said, “let us find out who benefited the most from the statements made during the incident.” He also pointed out that BJP MLAs had received IPL tickets as well.
Responding to discussions about relocating the Chinnaswamy Stadium, Suresh said the government has already approved the construction of a new stadium at a location he had proposed.
“I had suggested building a stadium in Surya City and submitted a proposal for it. Bengaluru needs four stadiums in four directions to cater to its growing population and encourage youth participation in sports,” he said.
He noted that apart from Kanteerava Stadium, KSCA, and the Football Stadium, there are limited facilities in the city.
“When I was a Lok Sabha member, I had proposed allocating 100 acres in my constituency at Surya City. The land was later earmarked and the plan approved,” he added.
Suresh said he has discussed the project with Minister Zameer Ahmed Khan, Rajiv Gandhi Housing Corporation Chairman Shivalingegowda, and Anekal MLA Shivanna.
“The Cabinet has now approved the project, and a stadium will be developed on around 50–60 acres,” he said.
He further added that he has requested the Deputy Chief Minister to build another stadium at Shivarama Karanth Layout through the BDA, where 40 acres have been allocated. Plans are also being discussed to develop a well-equipped stadium in Bidadi.
Commending state government's recent bilingual policy move, Suresh said forcing children to learn three languages could affect their comprehension.
“It is a good decision to make two languages compulsory. Learning a third language should be left to the choice of students and parents,” he said.
Responding to criticism from BJP leaders, he said their tendency is to oppose every decision of the government.
“To please their central leadership, they take a pro-Hindi stance. Instead, they should advocate for the adoption of Kannada in all states,” he said.
When asked about the earlier three-language policy under Congress, he said, “the situation is different now. Today, the focus should be on quality learning. Kannada should remain the primary language, while students and parents can choose an additional language.”
