Hon. Dayasiri Jayasekara, Attorney-at-Law

¶ 01 I will. Article 46(2) concerns the delegation of powers. Whether powers are delegated in writing or not is their matter. Historically, such delegation to a Deputy Minister was often in writing. If this Government has not delegated, we have no issue with that; that is not the point. When we raise a question here, the President does not come to answer as the Minister of Defence. Then 46(2) operates in practice: whether or not there is a Gazette, the Deputy Minister stands and answers on behalf of the President. We do not ask for the Gazette number of delegation; that is not our question.

¶ 02 The only point is this: in a system with an Executive President, if the President does not come as Minister of Defence, then practically either the Prime Minister or a Cabinet Minister must answer. Since that is not happening, you say we cannot bring a No-Confidence Motion against him; the only thing we can bring is a censure. Beyond that, accountability to Parliament lies with the Ministers. Therefore, your reliance on 46(2) is noted; but delegation issues arise only if challenged in court. In Parliament, the Deputy Minister functions as part of the Executive.

¶ 03 Please provide us the Attorney-General’s report and the Secretariat’s report. There is no legal impediment within Parliament. In Sri Lanka, even a Leader of the Opposition has faced No-Confidence Motions. What you have done sets a very bad precedent. Today there is effectively no one taking responsibility in Parliament. When the Deputy Minister answers here, under what law has power been given to him? If you rely on Article 46(2), then let the President come and answer. Do not allow answers without legal basis.