Luwie Ganeshathasan - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Uploads
Papers by Luwie Ganeshathasan
Routledge eBooks, Jul 9, 2024
Oxford University Press eBooks, Feb 15, 2024
This report discusses citizenship in Sri Lanka. It explores the history of citizenship in this co... more This report discusses citizenship in Sri Lanka. It explores the history of citizenship in this country, modes of acquisition and loss, and current debates and reform plans regarding citizenship policy.
Covid-19 in Asia
This chapter investigates Sri Lanka’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Covid-19 has posed for S... more This chapter investigates Sri Lanka’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Covid-19 has posed for Sri Lanka not only a public health challenge and an economic challenge but also, perhaps most seriously, a crisis of constitutional democracy. Although questions have been raised about the accuracy of government statistics, the scale of testing and contact tracing, and failures in providing protective equipment to front-line workers including military personnel, there is broad public approval of the government’s crisis response. However, much more alarming are the clear signs in the government’s response that the public health emergency has provided the impetus for an aggressive executive takeover of the state, steepening the curve of de-democratization. The chapter then describes the aspects of the governmental crisis response that are the cause of worry, and offers an analysis based on a framework drawn from comparative politics and comparative constitutional law as to the agentic, inst...
A Broader Analysis The legality of Mr. Sirisena's decision to reinstate Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake... more A Broader Analysis The legality of Mr. Sirisena's decision to reinstate Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake through executive order was questionable, though not strictly illegal. iii This is largely because it stemmed from a unique situation. This involved the initial removal of Dr. Bandaranayake-tainted by doubtful legality and an unfair process-followed by an invalid appointment, and no obvious route to review that appointment. iv A simple " legal or not " based on the law proper v would not do justice to these facts. Nonetheless, as we noted before, our previous analysis was narrowly limited to express provisions of the constitution. A holistic analysis must move beyond mere legality and examine broader principles, political realities, optics, and the effect of a decision on our democratic fabric. These were relevant in relation to Dr. Bandaranayake's ouster, and they are relevant here. Principles, Realities and Optics The rule of law and the separation of powers The rule of law and the separation of powers are fundamental to our Constitution. vi The former is to do with the consistency, predictability and transparency of governmental decisions. It abhors arbitrariness and overreach by the organs of government – that is by the Executive, the Legislature or the Judiciary. The latter doctrine allocates power between these organs to develop a system of checks and balances that prevents any one organ from overpowering the others. The notions that government should function within a clearly defined framework, and that each organ has a role in ensuring that other organs act within this framework, are essential to democratic governance. The appointment and removal of the head of the Judiciary is a significant matter which must not be divorced from these principles. Theoretically, any one of the three organs could have reviewed and reversed Mr. Peiris's alleged appointment. In the light of the above we must ask, " if the rule of law and separation of powers are meant to govern our State, which option – whether a legislative resolution, judicial review or executive correction – would have best promoted these fundamental principles? " Political Realities In a political vacuum, one could argue that judicial review or a Parliamentary resolution were better options than executive correction as far as the rule of law and the separation of powers are concerned. In theory, an appeal to the judiciary allows for an impartial, transparent and public process where the non-political arm of government would decide the question – promoting the rule of law and the separation of powers. A Parliamentary resolution, even if superfluous, vii would give the appearance of consultative decision-making by two arms of government in the
Routledge eBooks, Jul 9, 2024
Oxford University Press eBooks, Feb 15, 2024
This report discusses citizenship in Sri Lanka. It explores the history of citizenship in this co... more This report discusses citizenship in Sri Lanka. It explores the history of citizenship in this country, modes of acquisition and loss, and current debates and reform plans regarding citizenship policy.
Covid-19 in Asia
This chapter investigates Sri Lanka’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Covid-19 has posed for S... more This chapter investigates Sri Lanka’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Covid-19 has posed for Sri Lanka not only a public health challenge and an economic challenge but also, perhaps most seriously, a crisis of constitutional democracy. Although questions have been raised about the accuracy of government statistics, the scale of testing and contact tracing, and failures in providing protective equipment to front-line workers including military personnel, there is broad public approval of the government’s crisis response. However, much more alarming are the clear signs in the government’s response that the public health emergency has provided the impetus for an aggressive executive takeover of the state, steepening the curve of de-democratization. The chapter then describes the aspects of the governmental crisis response that are the cause of worry, and offers an analysis based on a framework drawn from comparative politics and comparative constitutional law as to the agentic, inst...
A Broader Analysis The legality of Mr. Sirisena's decision to reinstate Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake... more A Broader Analysis The legality of Mr. Sirisena's decision to reinstate Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake through executive order was questionable, though not strictly illegal. iii This is largely because it stemmed from a unique situation. This involved the initial removal of Dr. Bandaranayake-tainted by doubtful legality and an unfair process-followed by an invalid appointment, and no obvious route to review that appointment. iv A simple " legal or not " based on the law proper v would not do justice to these facts. Nonetheless, as we noted before, our previous analysis was narrowly limited to express provisions of the constitution. A holistic analysis must move beyond mere legality and examine broader principles, political realities, optics, and the effect of a decision on our democratic fabric. These were relevant in relation to Dr. Bandaranayake's ouster, and they are relevant here. Principles, Realities and Optics The rule of law and the separation of powers The rule of law and the separation of powers are fundamental to our Constitution. vi The former is to do with the consistency, predictability and transparency of governmental decisions. It abhors arbitrariness and overreach by the organs of government – that is by the Executive, the Legislature or the Judiciary. The latter doctrine allocates power between these organs to develop a system of checks and balances that prevents any one organ from overpowering the others. The notions that government should function within a clearly defined framework, and that each organ has a role in ensuring that other organs act within this framework, are essential to democratic governance. The appointment and removal of the head of the Judiciary is a significant matter which must not be divorced from these principles. Theoretically, any one of the three organs could have reviewed and reversed Mr. Peiris's alleged appointment. In the light of the above we must ask, " if the rule of law and separation of powers are meant to govern our State, which option – whether a legislative resolution, judicial review or executive correction – would have best promoted these fundamental principles? " Political Realities In a political vacuum, one could argue that judicial review or a Parliamentary resolution were better options than executive correction as far as the rule of law and the separation of powers are concerned. In theory, an appeal to the judiciary allows for an impartial, transparent and public process where the non-political arm of government would decide the question – promoting the rule of law and the separation of powers. A Parliamentary resolution, even if superfluous, vii would give the appearance of consultative decision-making by two arms of government in the