Colombo, 4 June 2026:

The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) expresses deep concern at recent indications by the National People’s Power (NPP) Government that the long-promised abolition of Sri Lanka’s executive presidential system is no longer considered a priority.

In a Daily Mirror report by Kelum Bandara of 1 June 2026, an unnamed “senior government source” is cited as saying “The introduction of a new Constitution including the abolishing of the Executive Presidency is not a priority for the government at the moment though it was an election promise.” The report also quotes Chandana Abayaratne, the Minister for Public Administration, Local Government and Provincial Councils Minister, as stating, “It is one of our electoral promises. Yet, we cannot prioritise it at the moment.”

This position marks a troubling departure from a clear and prominent manifesto commitment, and raises fundamental questions about democratic accountability, constitutional reform, and the integrity of electoral mandates.

The pledge to abolish the executive presidency was not a marginal or incidental promise. It was a central plank of the NPP’s political programme, reflecting a widely shared recognition across Sri Lankan society that the overcentralisation of power in a single office has not only historically contributed to democratic erosion, weakened institutional checks and balances, and facilitated abuses of authority, but that it was a core cause of the national insolvency crisis in 2022. This was encapsulated in the Aragalaya slogan of “system change.” Successive political movements, including the NPP after the Aragalaya, have rightly identified the repeal and replacement of the 1978 Constitution as essential to restoring public trust and strengthening governance.

From the standpoint of democratic theory and practice, the NPP’s current position is entirely untenable. Manifesto commitments serve as a critical mechanism of democratic choice and accountability. Voters rely on these commitments to make informed decisions, and governments derive legitimacy in part from their willingness to implement them. The NPP won both the presidency and an overwhelming parliamentary majority in the 2024 elections on the basis of a manifesto promising abolition of the executive presidency. Reneging on such a fundamental pledge without a compelling explanation undermines the relationship of trust between citizens and the Government.

While CPA recognises that governments operate under real constraints, including economic pressures, these factors cannot be used selectively to sideline commitments of such structural importance. Indeed, international and comparative evidence from functioning democracies demonstrates that governments routinely prioritise and implement core and high-salience promises even in difficult circumstances. The abolition of the executive presidency clearly falls into this category. To relegate it to a non-priority suggests not constraint, but a lack of political will, and a cavalier attitude bordering on contempt for the Sri Lankan electorate.

Moreover, the Government’s position risks perpetuating a pattern that has long weakened Sri Lankan democracy: the instrumental use of constitutional reform as an electoral promise, followed by post-election retreat. This cycle contributes to public disillusionment and reinforces perceptions that manifestos are merely signalling devices rather than genuine programmes for governance. Such an outcome is particularly damaging at a time when rebuilding confidence in political institutions is urgently needed.

It is also important to note that constitutional reform, by its nature, requires sustained political leadership and early prioritisation. Delaying action on the abolition of the executive presidency increases the likelihood that it will be indefinitely postponed, especially as short-term governance challenges crowd the policy agenda. The Government’s current stance therefore not only delays reform but may effectively foreclose it.

CPA therefore urges the NPP Government to:

1. Reaffirm its commitment to the abolition of the executive presidency as a matter of priority, ideally in a statement by the President or the Prime Minister to the House;
2. Provide a clear and time-bound roadmap for constitutional reform within the life of this Parliament;
3. Engage in transparent and inclusive consultations with political parties, civil society, and the public; and
4. Demonstrate, through concrete action, its commitment to democratic accountability and institutional reform.

Ultimately, the credibility of democratic governance depends not only on electoral victory, but on the faithful pursuit of the commitments made to secure it. The present moment offers the Government an opportunity to demonstrate that it understands this responsibility. To do otherwise risks further eroding public trust and undermining the very reforms it once championed.

25 May 2026, Colombo: The Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) expresses profound concern at the continued failure of successive governments—and now the present administration—to hold Provincial Council elections, despite clear public commitments and manifesto pledges to do so within a defined timeframe.

It is now more than a decade since elections to Provincial Councils were last conducted, with the last held in 2014.  The prolonged absence of elected provincial representatives has severely undermined the functioning of Sri Lanka’s system of devolved governance and eroded the democratic rights of citizens across the country.

At the core of this crisis lie unresolved legal and procedural issues stemming from the Provincial Councils Elections (Amendment) Act 2017, including the transition to a new electoral system and the requirement for fresh electoral boundary delimitation. While these challenges are real, it is equally clear that they have been repeatedly invoked to justify inaction. The delimitation process remains incomplete and disputed, and the absence of a coherent legal framework continues to prevent the conduct of elections. Yet, these are matters squarely within the competence of Government and Parliament to resolve.

CPA notes with particular disappointment that the present Government, which campaigned on a platform of democratic renewal and accountability, has failed to prioritise the necessary legislative and administrative measures required to break the impasse. Despite earlier assurances that Provincial Council elections would be held within a year of assuming office, recent statements indicate further postponements, citing legal ambiguity, fiscal constraints, and other emerging challenges. This pattern closely mirrors the conduct of previous administrations and raises serious concerns about the political will to restore democratic governance at the provincial level.

CPA is especially troubled that the Government’s policy position on the postponement of Provincial Council elections has been publicly articulated by Tilvin Silva, the General Secretary of one constituent party of the ruling coalition, rather than by a constitutionally accountable Cabinet Minister in Parliament. Mr Silva, who is not in Parliament and does not hold ministerial office, has outlined the Government’s reasoning for delay, including financial constraints and legal complications, in recent media statements.

The fact that such a critical matter of public policy—directly affecting the exercise of the franchise, the operation of constitutional institutions, and relating to the existing constitutional settlement of ethnic relations that is also part of an international treaty with India—is being communicated by a party official outside the formal structures of the state raises serious concerns about transparency, accountability, and the integrity of democratic governance. It suggests an increasingly blurred boundary between party and state, and gives rise to troubling questions as to where executive authority is in fact located.

Mr Silva, representing the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP), is also not the person who can inspire public confidence in the Government’s commitment to devolution given the JVP’s past record in opposition to that policy, including insurrectionary violence, populist mobilisation, and the use of the courts to stymie every effort at ethnic accommodation and power-sharing.

In particular, this development raises the spectre of a parallel configuration of power, in which party structures operate alongside—or potentially above—constitutionally mandated institutions. As we have highlighted before in relation to the Praja Shakthi and Clean Sri Lanka initiatives, CPA is concerned that this points to the possible construction of a party-state dynamic in Sri Lanka, where decision-making authority is exercised through informal or extra-constitutional channels rather than through institutions subject to democratic oversight and legal accountability. Such a trajectory is incompatible with the fundamental principles of the Constitution and risks further eroding public trust in governance.

The continued postponement of elections has resulted in Provincial Councils being administered by Governors appointed by the central government, in contravention of the spirit of representative democracy and the framework of devolution envisaged under the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The absence of elected bodies has weakened accountability, centralised decision-making, and contributed to a vacuum of democratic governance that disproportionately affects already marginalised regions.

CPA is further concerned that the delay risks eroding public confidence in democratic institutions and processes. Elections are not a matter of political convenience; they are a constitutional obligation and a fundamental expression of the sovereignty of the people. The persistent failure to hold Provincial Council elections, despite repeated promises, constitutes a serious breach of that obligation.

In light of these concerns, CPA calls on the Government to:

1. Take immediate and concrete legislative action to resolve the legal ambiguities surrounding the electoral system, including, if necessary, enabling the conduct of elections under the previous proportional representation system as an interim measure;
2. Establish a clear and time-bound roadmap for the completion of the delimitation process or alternative legal arrangements;
3. Ensure that all official policy positions are articulated and communicated by constitutionally accountable office-holders, in keeping with principles of good governance and democratic accountability;
4. Publicly reaffirm its commitment to holding Provincial Council elections without further delay and ensure transparency in all actions taken towards this end; and
5. Respect the democratic rights of the people of Sri Lanka by restoring elected provincial governance as a matter of urgency.

The continued delay in holding Provincial Council elections is not merely a technical or administrative issue; it is a fundamental question of democratic legitimacy, constitutional governance, and political accountability. CPA urges the Government to act decisively and without further delay to honour its commitments and uphold the democratic rights of the people of Sri Lanka. In doing so, the Government must at all times speak and act through democratically elected and accountable office-holders authorised by the Constitution. In particular, policy statements of such gravity must not be announced by the General Secretary of the JVP through the media, but be made on behalf of the Government in Parliament, by a member of the Cabinet bound by collective responsibility, and subject to the controls of parliamentary scrutiny and confidence.