The Hon. Ajith P. Perera

¶ 01 Hon. Deputy Speaker, our proceedings are governed by Standing Orders. Under Standing Order 76(1), once a decision is taken on a matter, that is final for that matter. It binds me, you in the Chair, all 225 Members and the Hon. Speaker. The rejection of the No-Confidence Motion against the Deputy Minister of Public Security was on 10 September 2025. The Speaker rejected it then without giving reasons. Today, he again offered reasons and rejected it once more. Under 76(1), that cannot be done.

¶ 02 I examined whether other Standing Orders—139 to 142—grant any general power to the Speaker to do so. Those apply only where there is no specific provision elsewhere. I was involved in drafting the current Standing Orders, so I am familiar. The same matter cannot be decided twice.

¶ 03 We also requested the Attorney-General’s opinion. By letter dated 20.08.2025 addressed to the Secretary-General, the Attorney-General stated there is no legal impediment, nor any bar from ongoing criminal cases, to proceed with the No-Confidence Motion. I table that letter again for emphasis.

¶ 04 Subsequently, at the Speaker’s request, the Secretary-General and the Secretariat submitted a detailed report dated 03.09.2025 signed by the Secretariat. Nowhere does it say to reject the Motion. It notes that, though there is no specific provision, by principle and precedent, as the Deputy Minister is an office-bearer, a No-Confidence Motion may proceed. I table that.

¶ 05 Then, on 04.09.2025, another report was produced offering two options: proceed with a Censure Motion, or, alternatively, proceed with the No-Confidence Motion “in line with said precedence considering that the Deputy Minister is an Office bearer.” Thus, the Secretariat—well-versed in Parliamentary practice—advised that the Motion may proceed. Priyani Wijesekera’s authoritative text on Parliamentary practice in Sri Lanka also treats Censure and No-Confidence as functionally equivalent in our usage.

¶ 06 Therefore, the Speaker should heed the Secretariat’s guidance. Under Standing Order 76(1), he cannot revisit and re-decide the same matter. Previous Speakers, in giving rulings, have weighed external precedents, case law and institutional advice. Sadly, that discipline has not been followed here.

¶ 07 Our Parliamentary history contains many No-Confidence Motions against Speakers: R.S. Pelpola (22.11.1963), Shirley Corea (09.11.1966), M.A. Bakir Markar (23.12.1980), M.H. Mohamed (10.10.1991 and again 09.06.1992), and most recently in 2024 against Speaker Mahinda Yapa Abeywardena (19.03.2024). If the Speaker himself violates Standing Orders and curtails the Members’ supreme forum to hold office-holders to account, there is no graver violation.

¶ 08 Therefore, Hon. Deputy Speaker, with regret I state that the Opposition has decided to bring a No-Confidence Motion against the Speaker, which we will submit at the appropriate time. Thank you.