As no political party or independent group could secure 50 out of hundred control of the Colombo Municipal Council through the recent local government election, the power to appoint the Mayor and Deputy Mayor was transferred to the Western Provincial Commissioner.
Accordingly, the Colombo Municipal Council convened under the presidency of Western Provincial Commissioner Sarangika Jayasundara on the 16th, and the Mayor was elected. A secret ballot was held to select the Mayor, and following this appointment, there was political discussion regarding how the Commissioner conducted the process.

The opposition, led by the Samagi Jana Balawegaya, claimed that the Commissioner’s conduct was not lawful, while the National People’s Power argued that her actions were following the relevant provisions of the Local Authorities Elections Ordinance.

FactSeeker turned its attention to a statement made in Parliament on the 17th by Deputy Minister of Public Security and Parliamentary Affairs, Sunil Watagala. In his statement, he quoted several sections from the Local Authorities Elections (Amendment) Act No. 22 of 2012 to claim that the Commissioner acted legally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKm0p_jDMIo

However, discrepancies were noted between the Deputy Minister’s statement and the actual provisions of the Act, prompting FactSeeker to investigate further.

The Deputy Minister stated as follows:
“This begins with Section 66d of the Local Government Elections Act. Section 66d of the Amendment Act No. 22 of 2012 says that until the Chairman or Mayor is elected for a Municipal or Urban Council, the Commissioner presides over the proceedings. According to subsection (6), when two or more names are proposed and confirmed as candidates for Mayor, the method of election must be decided by a motion passed by the members present, whether by open or secret ballot. If the vote is tied, the decision must be made by drawing lots. Then the section says that a secret ballot must be held.”

FactSeeker reviewed this claim against the actual text of the law.

According to subsection 6 of Section 66d, the law states:

“If two or more members are nominated and confirmed for appointment as Mayor, the method of election shall be decided by a motion passed by the members present, either by open or secret ballot. If the votes cast in such a motion are evenly divided, the method of appointment shall be determined by drawing lots in a manner prescribed by the presiding officer, in his presence.”

However, contrary to the Deputy Minister’s claim, this section does not go on to state that a secret ballot must be held.

FactSeeker also noted that the Deputy Minister further stated there was no specific mention in the Act about whether the vote should be open or secret, and thus, the method of voting would be up to the discretion of the presiding officer. He added, “A later section says that the official presiding over the session must act at their discretion.”

FactSeeker examined whether such a provision existed in the law and found no such reference giving the presiding officer discretionary power to choose the voting method at their will.

The provisions mentioned in Sections 7 and 8 are as follows:

Speaking in Parliament today (19), SLMC MP President’s Counsel Nizam Kariyappar stated that Deputy Minister Sunil Watagala had misled Parliament by quoting the wrong provision of the Local Authorities Elections (Amendment) Act No. 22 of 2012. He further clarified that Section 66. D (6) of the Act, which was cited, does not grant any discretionary power to the Provincial Commissioner.

Accordingly, FactSeeker confirms that Deputy Minister Sunil Watagala’s claim that the Provincial Commissioner had the legal authority to act at her discretion under section 66. D. (6) of the Local Authorities Elections (Amendment) Act No. 22 of 2012 is false.

Disclaimer: Due to inconsistencies identified between the Sinhala and English versions of the above Act, we have translated the Sinhala version and made it available here.