"As a member of the UNP, the country’s single largest political party, I believe that the time is right to call upon my fellow members of opposition to unite in shedding our differences, letting go of old wars and seemingly insurmountably diverse ideologies, in order to unite and emerge stronger than ever against a common enemy," Jayasuriya was quoted as saying in a statement by The Island newspaper.

"The executive presidency is not just the enemy of the UNP or the JVP (a Marxist party) or the TNA (a Tamil minority party) or even the SLFP (the main party of the ruling coalition) – in its all pervasive, destructive omnipresence it is the singular enemy of Sri Lanka and so our agenda, as a common opposition would be a worthy one and one that will win the support of all Sri Lankans."

No Apology

Jayasuriya however has not apologized to the people of Sri Lanka for the constitution enacted by his party in 1978, which paved the way for an unrestrained state.

Legal analysts say the 1978 constitution dealt the final blow to the institution of permanent secretaries which separated the general machinery of the state from the political administration allowing rule of law and justice to be dispensed to the people equally.

Without just rule of law, there can be no freedom.

The institution of permanent secretaries was already partially broken in a 1972 constitution which abolished the island's civil service commission, a British device which gave rule of law and justice not only to Britain, but even to its colonial territories.

The civil service commission which was in charge of appointments transfers and disciplinary action of permanent secretaries, the most senior civil servants, allowing state officials act justly and ensure rule of law without fearing reprisals from elected rulers.

The 1972 constitution made the tasks a function of the cabinet and the 1978 constitution made the president the sole appointing authority and disciplinarian. Ministry secretaries, not only judges, need security of tenor to act justly by the people.

Analysts say the new system led to a general deterioration of rule of law in the island, in the dispensation of not only criminal justice but in all government services.

An attempt was made to correct the system with so-called 'constitutional councils' which was also swept away by the last change to the constitution.

Arbitrary Rule

"The intimidation of the press, the harassment of political detractors and the impunity with which the regime conducts itself can all be traced directly back to the tragic flaws of our presidential system which affords absolute power," Jayasuriya said.

"Every aspect of life, whether it is judicial independence, the rule of law, media freedom or the economy is shaped and determined by the will of one all powerful man.

"Until one individual can no longer lay claim to such absolute power, none of these issues can be put right and Sri Lanka and Sri Lankans will continue to suffer the insane policies derived by its all powerful rulers for their benefit and theirs alone."

Legal analysts have said that Sri Lanka's constitution itself promoted arbitrary rule, when the fundamental objectives of a constitution in the post-feudal Europe was to restrain the state (which had replaced the feudal ruler) and provide absolute guarantees of equality to people.

Overtime, the 'police', the lynchpin of the criminal justice system which protected the people from arbitrary action of powerful persons in the society in Western Europe, became an Eastern European-style device which protected rulers instead.

Legal analysts have said that while the fundamental characteristics of many institutions in Sri Lanka had been gradually turned upside down they had continued to be referred to under the old labels, misleading the public.

Before the arrival of Europeans Sri Lanka also had a system of justice, which when operated properly allowed 'just kings' to rule for long periods in peace and prosperity.

Without a legislating parliament which can cook up even unjust laws overnight, feudal rulers were restrained by centuries old custom which evolved very slowly as well as practices in texts coming from elsewhere in South Asia (Nithishashtra), according to some writers.

A feudal rule was also restrained by ministers and other practices which allowed aggrieved citizens and their children to protest in front of castle gates by wailing.