Sri Lanka is slowly moving from an illiberal democracy to an authoritarian state.

"A resolution of this conflict is possible by promoting the concept that democracy and individual freedom are mutually supportive. A general acceptance both constitutional and politically that democracy includes upholding the freedom of individuals."

--------------------------

by Ranil Wickremesinghe in Berlin to Sri Lanka Guardian

(May 22, Berlin, Sri Lanka Guardian) Individual liberties are not always explicit in democracies. Popular belief equates democracy with representative democracy together with the notion that Parliament is sovereign and can do anything, other than make a man into a woman or woman into a man. At times, the democratic process can come into conflict with that of individual liberties – especially in evolving democracies. This is also due to lack of constitutional provisions to protect individual rights as well as a legal system unable to prevent the encroachment on such freedom. A free world is possible only, if the conflict between democratic systems and individual freedom can be resolved.

Even in Western Europe, individual freedom began to be upheld throughout the region only after World War II, one and a half centuries after the American and French Revolutions. Therefore, in developing democracies the concept of individual liberty has yet to take root in politics or become ingrained as a practice. There have not been any leaders of these states who have worked towards building political institutions both to uphold the democratic process as well as safeguard individual liberties, nor are there political cultures that have given priority to individual freedoms. Whenever a democratically elected representative body seek to centralise power without any checks and balances, the concept of individual freedom is shelved into a secondary position. Fareed Zakaria in his book the ‘Future of Freedom’ refers to these countries as ‘Illiberal Democracies’. Today, most unfortunately, the number of illiberal democracies is growing in the world.

In some other states, the so-called democratically-elected leaders – once they have been elected - subvert the democratic process to perpetuate their own powers at the expense of people’s rights and liberties. My country, Sri Lanka is slowly moving from an illiberal democracy to an authoritarian state.

• • A Government which is attempting to use a war against the LTTE to slowly extinguish democracy.
• 
  • This includes weakening the party system to replace it with family rule.
  
• • Entering in to electoral alliances with Tamil para military group accused of human rights violations. Contesting the election, intimidating voters and ballot stuffing in Tamil areas.
  
• • Bypassing Parliament in raising loans and violating Parliamentary control of expenditure.
  
• • Sabotaging the functioning of the Constitutional Council, the Independent Police Commission, the Independent Public Service Commission, the Election Commission and the Human Rights Commission.

A resolution of this conflict is possible by promoting the concept that democracy and individual freedom are mutually supportive. A general acceptance both constitutional and politically that democracy includes upholding the freedom of individuals.

This is the appropriate forum to address these issues. I will present a few proposals to start the discussion.

1. Specify the political values of a democratic state with equal emphasis on democratic process as well as individual liberties. Eg. Article 1a of the Treaty of European Union inserted by the Treaty of Lisbon. Specifies respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights.

“Article 1a :

The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.”

2. Promote constitutional safeguards to prevent political parties and leaders of governments from subverting the basic democratic order. Eg. Article 18 and 20 of the German Constitution.

“Article 18 ((Forfeiture of basic rights)

Whoever abuses freedom of opinion, in particular freedom of the press (Article 5, paragraph 1) freedom of teaching (Article 5, paragraph 3), freedom of assembly (Article 8), freedom of association (Article 9), the secrecy of mail posts and telecommunications (Article 10), property (Article 14), or the right of asylum (Article 16, paragraph 2) in order to attack the free democratic basic order, forfeits these basic rights. The forfeiture and its extent are pronounced byt he Federal Constitutional Court.

• “Article 20 (Basic principles of state order, right to resist).
• 
  1. The Federal Republic of Germany is a democratic and social Federal state.
  
• 2. All state authority emanates from the people. It is exercised by the people by means of elections and voting and by separate legislative, executive and judicial organs.
  
• 3. Legislation is subject to the constitutional order; the executive and the judiciary are bound by the law.
  
• 4. All Germans shall have the right to resist any person seeking to abolish this constitutional order, should no other remedy be possible. (inserted 24 June 1968)”

1. Debunking the notion that individual freedom is a western concept, Samuel Huntingdon in “The Clash of Civilisation” sought to identify the individual freedoms as a Western principle. An unfortunate consequence of this is that human rights and individual freedoms are viewed in some parts of the world as an imposition by the West. The ideas of individual freedom in respect for human life, and the dignity of man have been preached for thousands of years in many parts of the world. For instance, 2,500 years ago Gautama the Buddha preached the sanctity of life, equality, individualism and freedom. Emperor Ashoka who ruled the Mauryan Empire in India put these principles in to practice. Therefore, we must emphasise the fact that these are all common values thereby enabling many societies to identify with some of the principles. We must also promote political cultures that respect individual freedom and build national political institutes which provide effective safeguards.

It is not possible to promote these values if Islam is portrayed as a religion hostile to democracy. The largest numbers of Muslims live in our region, South and South East Asia, and their commitment to these values is no less than ours. Our task will be much easier if we can speed up the creation of a Palestine State while upholding Israel’s right of existence.

2. The Commonwealth of Nations approach to Good Governance. The Harare Declaration of 1991 committed the commonwealth to uphold Good Governance.
Harare Declaration :

• “the protection and promotion of the fundamental political values of the Commonwealth;
  
• • democracy, democratic processes and institutions which reflect national circumstances, the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, just and honest government;
  
• • fundamental human rights, including equal rights and opportunities for all citizens regardless of race, colour, creed or political belief:”

The Millbrook Action Programme of 1995 specifies the measures in response to violations of Harare principles.

Milbrook Commonwealth Action Programme

B. Measures in Response to Violations of the Harare Principles

“3. Where a member country is perceived to be clearly in violation of the Harare Commonwealth Declaration, and particularly in the event of an unconstitutional overthrow of a democratically elected government, appropriate steps should be taken to express the collective concern of Commonwealth countries and to encourage the restoration of democracy within a reasonable time frame. These include:

• i. immediate public expression by the Secretary-General of the Commonwealth's collective disapproval of any such infringement of the Harare principles;
  
• ii. early contact by the Secretary-General with the de facto government, followed by continued good offices and appropriate technical assistance to facilitate an early restoration of democracy;
  
• iii. encouraging bilateral démarches by member countries, especially those within the region, both to express disapproval and to support early restoration of democracy;
  
• iv. appointment of an envoy or a group of eminent Commonwealth representatives where, following the Secretary-General's contacts with the authorities concerned, such a mission is deemed beneficial in reinforcing the Commonwealth's good offices role;
  
• v. stipulation of up to two years as the time frame for the restoration of democracy where the institutions are not in place to permit the holding of elections within, say, a maximum of six months;
  
• vi. pending restoration of democracy, exclusion of the government concerned from participation at ministerial-level meetings of the Commonwealth, including Commonwealth Heads of Government Meetings;
  
• vii. suspension of participation at all Commonwealth meetings and of Commonwealth technical assistance if acceptable progress is not recorded by the government concerned after a period of two years; and
  
• viii. consideration of appropriate further bilateral and multilateral measures by all member states (e.g. limitation of government-to-government contacts; people-to-people measures; trade restrictions; and, in exceptional cases, suspension from the association), to reinforce the need for change in the event that the government concerned chooses to leave the Commonwealth and/or persists in violating the principles of the Harare Commonwealth Declaration even after two years.”

C. MECHANISM FOR IMPLEMENTAION OF MEASURES

"4. We have decided to establish a Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group on the Harare Declaration in order to deal with serious or persistent violations of the principles contained in that declaration. The Group will be convened by the Secretary-General and will comprise the Foreign Ministers of eight countries, supplemented as appropriate by one or two additional ministerial representatives from the region concerned. It will be the Group’s task to assess the nature of the infringement and recommend measures for collective Commonwealth action aimed at the speedy restoration of democracy and constitutional rule.

2. An International Declaration by 2020 embodying these concepts is not an impossible task. It is doable. Some will question the necessity of such a declaration when we have the UN Human Rights Declaration and the ICCPR. Remember the average person on the streets of Lagos, Karachi, Colombo, Calcutta, Bangkok do not always make the connection between individual freedom and democracy. To many of them the idea of democracy is linked to a Government of the people, by the people and for the people. As I said at the start, the concept that democracy and individual freedom are mutually supportive must take root globally. The preparation of such a declaration will bring together like minded people throughout the world. The process of drafting the document will by itself be a global awareness program. What we can do is to initiate the proposal.

( The article has delivered by Ranil Wickremesinghe – Leader of the Opposition in Sri Lanka at the International Conference in Berlin to mark the 50th Anniversary of Friedrich Naumann Stiftung Fur Die Freiheit on May 21, 2008 at the International Conference was on “Master Plan 2050 – Strategies for a Free World”.)
- Sri Lanka Guardian