Political violence;Only the powerless suffer

By Shanie
Courtesy: The Island

(January 23, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) "In our country the problem is not that people do not know what is correct; they know but justify doing what is wrong for short term gain rather than looking at the welfare of this country with her long history and long future. We have to ask that you please use your authority in the run-up to the election to free us from the taint of any impression that politics is to further politicians’ interests rather than those of the people (the ‘politicisation of politics’) and corruption of the whole process. We would like to see all the actions and speaking done on your behalf be of the highest standard in keeping with the norms of Sri Lankan civilised behaviour of which we know with certainty you are aware. The public also know what is correct and must please be shown it in action, rather than being confronted with breaches of correct and civilised conduct. The public is also capable of recognising correct action and appreciating it—in this case with a supportive vote!"

Once in a while, when it is election time, we have the politicians coming around with various promises to make our lives better. Manifestos and ‘Chinthanayas’ spell out policies and programmes which they pledge to implement when elected to power. The people are told that those programmes will ease the burden of living, will make life for our children more promising, ensure that there is law and order and that our community will be able to lead a contented, secure and healthy life. Many of these promises are forgotten after election day but at least a debate is generated on them before and after election. But this time around, the debates are not about the promises contained in the manifestos of the respective candidates. In point of fact, there is no debate on any subject. It is a question of mud-slinging, name-calling and unleashing violence.

It is this that has prompted three senior and respected citizens to show their concern at this lack of civilised behaviour in this election. Former Vice Chancellor Arjuna Aluvihare, former UN diplomat Jayantha Dhanapala and former head of the Chamber of Commerce Chandra Jayaratne have addressed an open letter to the two principal candidates at the forthcoming Presidential Election. The Citizen’s Movement for Good Governance had earlier addressed a questionnaire to the candidates and requested their commitment to implement some basic proposals within a stated time frame. The Open Letter by the three concerned citizens, an extract of which we quote at the beginning of this column, is the next best document to come out in the run-up to the election.

The current regime must bear the primay responsibility for the present lawless state of affairs in the country. To an independent observer it appears that the government wants to win re-election at any cost. In their desperation at the strong challenge by Sarath Fonseka, they have shown that they have no qualms about manipulating the law enforcement authorities to flout election laws, misuse state resources and engage in unprecedented violence. There has been counter-violence by the opposition alliance too but, however distasteful it is, such a response is to be expected. To turn the other cheek may be good religious teaching but to do so in the hurly burly of violent politics is to invite more violence. It is for this reason that the plea by the senior citizens will be echoed by all right thinking people. Politicians in authority, both in the government as well as in the opposition, must not give the people the impression that they are in politics to further their own or family interests rather than that of the nation. Apologists who make excuses or even gloss over the violation of the constitution and election laws, the blatant misuse of state resources that belong to the people and the violence unleashed on political opponents are equally guilty of crimes against the people.

A Vote for Change

Ukku Banda Wijekoon was a politician from the J. R. Jayewardene era. A former senior public servant, he turned to politics in 1970. Although a son of Uva, in 1977 he became a member of parliament for Dambadeniya in the North Western Province. He was later to be a cabinet minister and still later, Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Russia. He is standing as a candidate in this election on a somewhat utopian platform. Based on Mahatma Gandhi’s statement: ‘You must be the change you wish to see in the world’, Wijekoon wants to initiate constitutional reform for a ‘partyless people’s power’. Wijekoon may have no hope of being elected, but here at least is a senior politician challenging the country to think on new lines and to effect a change in the country’s political system by following Gandhi’s dictum that we must ourselves change if we are to be the agents of change.

A change, though of a different sort, is also the call to the working people of this country from the Ceylon Mercantile Union, the principal and oldest trade union of private sector white collar workers. After listing a litany of the constitutional violations and abuses of state power against the workers and people of this country, the CMU’s lengthy statement concludes: "Having regard to all the above mentioned facts and circumstances, our Executive Committee considers that that the re-election of President Rajapakse will only mean the continuance or even worsening of the living conditions of the working people, under the continuing political conditions of an already militarised society, in which democratic and human rights are no longer respected by the ruling regime. We have no reason to believe that General Fonseka will end this situation and change it for the better for the working people, with the political support of the UNP and the JVP. It is our considered view therefore that our own Union and other organisations of the working people, in urban as well as rural areas, will have to rely on their own strength and their capacity to combine their forces to deal with the situation that they will have to face after 26th January."

It is not an easy decision for the voters to take on 26th January. The incumbent President’s track record over the past four years does not bring him much credit. It is true that he presided over the defeat of LTTE terrorism. But Sarath Fonseka can equally claim credit for having led the Army in this victory. He provided the military leadership while Mahinda Rajapakse provided the political leadership. The victory would not have been possible if one of them was lacking. But Rajapakse’s record on other areas is hugely disappointing. By brazenly violating the Constitution, he has politicised the Public Service and the Police, thereby dismantling the democratic institutions built up over the years. Lawlessness, abductions, killings and harassment of political opponents have been carried out with impunity. The cost of basic food items keep rising to unbearable levels, despite statements by ministers that they are being reduced. All this while, we see politicians and their families leading lives of luxury Sarath Fonseks, if elected, may or may not fare much better. But there is a glimmer of hope when he categorically states that, if elected, his first act would be to do his constitutional duty by appointing the Constitutional Council in terms of the 17th Amendment. That at least is a first and significant step.

The Post Election Scenario

The results of the election will be known within the next five days. Judging by the level of pre-election violence, there could be much greater violence after the election. Particularly if there is a regime change, there will be tendency by the victims to take revenge on opponents who have unleashed violence on them during the pre-poll period.. We hope our leaders are mature enough to ensure that their supporters do not engage in post-election violence and take appropriate measures to prevent it. It is only the poor and the powerless who become victims of violence. The political big-timers and strong-men who encourage violence stand aloof. It is such people who should be subject not to violence but to the due process of the law.