INTRODUCTION
Bicameral legislature is one in which two assemblies share legislative power. Around 80 countries worldwide have a bicameral legislature. In general terms, bicameralism is more common in federal, large and presidential states, while unicameralism is more common in unitary, small, parliamentary ones.
An important role of the second Chamber is to view legislation and public affairs from a new perspective using the background and experience of the members occupying the second Chamber.
Historical thinking about second chambers has been concerned with ‘checks and balances’ as desirable in a legislative assembly to “double the security of the people by requiring the concurrence of two distinct bodies”.
Another useful role is in participating in the legislative process; and playing a role in connection with proposed constitutional change.
It is not enough, however, for the second chamber merely to add its own voice to the other voices raised in legislative debates. It must, in addition, have the formal power to require those who initiate legislation to justify their proposals to the public and to both Houses of Parliament, if need be for a second time. .
A second legislative body may enable a more nuanced and complete representation of society, with greater representation for territorial, communal or other minorities. There are also concerns about the effects of concentrating power in a single elected assembly. The absence of checks and balances in a single chamber may lead to hasty and poorly considered decisions, to technically deficient legislation or to excessively partisan legislation that makes no concession to strongly held minority views. For these reasons, many countries have a second legislative chamber— often with distinct composition, function and powers—in order to complement and balance the primary chamber.
Second chambers are usually small, in terms of number of members, when compared to the first chamber. This is intended to encourage a more intimate and informal style of debate, particularly in review chambers. The members must be adequately compensated and be limited for a period of 2 years before being filled again. Each person who occupied the second chamber gets only one opportunity to serve.
SITUATION IN SRI LANKA BEFORE INDEPENDENCE
The Donoughmore Constitution which was in operation from 1931-1947, did not satisfy the aspirations of the Sri Lankans. They continued to clamour for a fully responsible government or dominion status.
As a result the Soulbury Commission which was sent to Sri Lanka in 1944 proposed a new constitution.
Until 1931when the Donoughmore constitution came into effect there were two separate institutions known as the Legislative Council and the Executive Council. Therefore there was no relationship between the framing of legislation and their implementation. The Donoughmore Commission which regarded this feature as a main weakness that had existed so far dissolved these two institutions and recommended one institution called the State Council.
A bicameral legislature with a House of Representatives and Second Chamber or Senate was introduced. The Senate consisted of 30 members of them 15 were elected by the vote of the House of Representatives and the other 15 were nominated by the Governor General on the advice of the Prime Minister.
In the twenty-four years of its existence, the Senate enabled proposed legislation as well as governance issues to be debated by a small group of men and women who had reached the pinnacle of their respective professions and other fields of endeavour.
BILL TO ABOLISH THE SENATE
On 28th October 1970, the House of Representatives passed, with 117 for and 16 against, the Bill to abolish the Senate.
On 23rd September 1971, the Senate convened for its final meeting. On 2nd October 1971, the Governor-General assented to the Bill and the Ceylon (Constitution and Independence) Amendment Act No.36 of 1971 came into force, converting Ceylon’s bicameral legislature into a unicameral one.
WHAT IS SORTITION
Sortition can be easily explained (also known as selection by lottery, selection by lot, allotment, democratic lottery), as the selection of public officials or jurors using a random representative sample.
BACKGROUND
Even though in our society we believe that elections and democracy are inseparable, the ancient Greeks thought that elections are part and parcel of an oligarchy. It was oligarchical Sparta, rather than democratic Athens, that elected its government.
In the Greek system political offices were distributed using a lottery which is called Sortition. Since the 1990s, historians, sociologists and political scientists have all shown renewed interest
in sortition, a device which has also resurfaced in public discussions in many countries around the world.
While history records on the use of sortition in politics, in particular during Greek and Roman Antiquity as well as during the Middle Ages in Italy and Spain, such interest was relatively incidental.
At the turn of the 2000s and 2010s, four political scientists and sociologists — Anja Röcke (2005), Yves Sintomer (2007, 2011), Oliver Dowlen (2008) and Hubertus Buchstein (2009) — published historical surveys of the use of random selection in politics.
This method of selection was not limited simply to Christian Europe. It was a wide spread practice in China from 16th to 20th Century. The Chinese coupling of random selection and competitive examinations was unique, however, and was not replicated anywhere in European history.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Before we embark on the implementation, it will be necessary to clearly define pool of candidates. It should be decided whether they allot from eligible volunteers, from those screened by education, experience, or a passing grade on a test, or screened by election by those selected by a previous round of random selection, or from various professions such as Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants or population at large. A multi-stage process in which random selection is alternated with other screening methods can be used, as in the Venetian system.
The introduction of a variable percentage of randomly selected independent legislators in a Parliament can increase the global efficiency of a legislature, in terms of both number of laws passed and average social welfare obtained.
RATIONALE
In this type of citizen’s assembly decisions are not burdened by political rivalry. This also provides an opportunity for the public to oversee the government’s activities and make corrections of its actions, should the need arise. It is an opportunity to improve the way the country functions, and this in turn allows achieving a better quality of life. Both houses must have equal power.
This model is also based on the premise that through the use of citizens’ assemblies, people are able to make sensible and well-considered decisions that will contribute to the improved quality of their lives.
The main thrust is to empathize that democracy is for everyone and not as select few. This not only allows any person to be randomly selected but also that anyone can send their comments, suggestions, and feedback to the assembly.
BENEFITS
Fair
The way of selecting by lots provides every person an equal chance of being selected, regardless of age, gender, location or any other characteristic.
Transparent
Using stratified random selection and a clear, open process reduces the influence of vested interests — you will not be engaging with the backdoor entrants and ‘usual suspects’.
Effective
Available evidence from around the world shows that diverse groups are better decision makers compared to homogenous groups.
Deliberative
Assembly members work together to identify the pros, cons and trade-offs of policy options, giving you high-quality public judgements backed by considered, easily understood reasons. Innovative
You will be at the forefront of democratic innovation and citizen empowerment and engagement.
Prof.Dr.Lakshman Madurasinghe PhD., LLD., D Litt