| by Tisaranee Gunasekara
“Terrorist – one who favours or
uses terror-inspiring methods of governing or of coercing government or
community.” - The Oxford Dictionary
( October 14, 2012, Colombo, Sri
Lanka Guardian) A protest over the attack on JSC Secretary… an act of
‘exemplary terror’
The attack on the Secretary of
the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is an act of terrorism.
Not all terrorists lurk in the
shadows, hiding from the authorities. Some terrorists are the authorities.
An insatiable appetite for
absolute power/total control is a quality common to state and non-state
terrorists. Both varieties (from Chancellor Hitler to Tiger Leader Pirapaharan)
use ‘exemplary terror’ to frighten opponents into mindless compliance.
The attack on Manjula
Tillekaratne was an act of ‘exemplary terror’. It was committed in the open,
for the world to see; its aim was not just to punish a recalcitrant JSC
Secretary but also to teach the Judiciary a lesson in obedience and demonstrate
to the public the high costs of resistance.
Terrorists cannot be appeased.
Compliance and silence merely embolden them into committing ever more heinous
crimes. The response to the attack on the JSC Secretary must be strong and
unequivocal; it must also be societal and not merely judicial. If the judiciary
and the civil society fail to stand together, in protest against this latest
outrage, and in defence of judicial independence, terror acts will not cease.
Terror-practitioners will gain strength from our weakness. And no one will be
safe, from the lowliest farmer to the highest judge, from outspoken
media-personnel to pro-establishment military men, from the most radical worker
or student to the most conservative businessman or professional.
During his interrogation by the
Nazis, German Jurist Hans von Dohnanyi identified ‘arbitrariness in matters of
law’ as the primary reason for his courageous resistance to Hitler. Ancient
Lankans knew that ‘arbitrariness in matters of law’ is coeval with rampant
injustice, as evidenced by the folklore about King Kekille. Kekille was not a
historical person but a historical phenomenon, a symbol of the unbreakable
nexus between arbitrary rule and lawlessness. Modern Lankans can forget that
age-old wisdom only at their own cost.
President Rajapaksa has ordered a
police investigation into the attack on the JSC Secretary. President Rajapaksa
ordered a police investigation when Lasantha Wickrematunge was murdered. Three
and a half years and three police teams later, the killers remain free and
justice is not done.
Lankan police have an excellent
track record in solving non-political crimes. Lankan police fail to ‘catch
their man’ only when their man enjoys political patronage (a la Malaka Silva)
or is a politician (a la Duminda Silva). When a Buddhist monk was killed in
Kotte, the police cracked the case in an amazingly short time, because it was a
non-political crime. But in Kahawatte the police floundered even as bodies
piled up, because a powerful local politico reportedly masterminded the
killings.
That political/non-political
distinction makes all the difference between police competence and
incompetence.
The manner in which the police
investigate the attack on Mr. Tillekaratne would thus be revealing. If this is
an ordinary crime, the police will get their men, fast. If this is a political
crime, the police will meander endlessly. Either no one will be caught; or the
wrong men will be apprehended, to be released once the attack is old news.
In Sri Lanka crime is rife. Most
ordinary crimes are secret crimes because most ordinary criminals fear the law.
Political crimes are often committed in the open because the perpetrators – or
their puppet-masters – are above the law. Manjula Tillekaratne’s attackers
struck in broad daylight and in public, just as Lasantha Wickrematunge’s did.
That modus operandi is indicative of a sense of power and of impunity alien to
ordinary criminals.
The political conjuncture in
which the attack happened is characterised by a budding conflict between the
Executive and the Judiciary. The physical attack was preceded by a
well-orchestrated campaign to vilify Mr. Tillekaratne as an upstart, an abuser
of power and of female magistrates. (Incidentally, will there be an attempt to
blame the attack on an outraged parent?).
The precise timing of the attack
is also thought-provoking. Cricket is the opium of Lankan masses and the attack
happened on the day of a critical match. Had Lanka won the T20 title, the
resultant euphoria would have made the attack on the JSC Secretary seem like
minutely small change.
Three years after the victorious
conclusion of the war, the largest chunk of national wealth continues to be
consumed by the Ministry of Defence and Urban Development (the title itself is
symbolic of the galloping militarization besetting Sri Lanka). In 2013, this
allocation will increase by a huge 25.9%.
In this security-obsessed
country, not even a top judicial official is secure.
Who is the Ministry of Defence
defending?
Subjecting the State
Checks and balances are a
Rajapaksa anathema.
The regime is reportedly planning
to introduce new laws to disempower the Auditor General. According to Treasury
Secretary, the existing financial regulations must be replaced because they
create a paper-trail and give “…plenty of ammunition for the Auditor General to
go through a check list and say everything is bad and project that there is bad
governance in the country” (The Island – 9.10.2012). So that is how the
Rajapaksas plan to achieve good governance: not by eliminating bad practices
but by making it legally impossible for the Auditor General to investigate or
critique bad practices!
The Treasury Secretary opines
that new regulations are needed “to give the public officials freedom and the
capacity to deliver the demands and expectations of the people” ibid).
President Rajapaksa states that “Acts which do not serve any practical purpose
should not be allowed to get in the way of the government’s development
initiatives…” (Daily Mirror – 8.10.2012). Is the regime planning a ‘legal
revolution’ to annihilate all checks and balances and bestow untrammelled power
on the Rajapaksas and their cohorts? Will the end be an Orwellian state in
which bad is good, dishonest is honest and false is true?
This is what the Nazis called
Gleichschaltung: turning state and society into a preserve and an extension of
Herr Hitler and his terrorist-cohorts.
And the Judiciary stands in the
way, as was evident from its role vis-à-vis the Divi Neguma Bill.
Last week, President Rajapaksa
claimed that the opponents of the Divi Neguma Bill (and other similar measures)
are trying to achieve what the Tigers could not in 30 years of war. And one
thought the Tigers fought to divide Sri Lanka and set up a state of Eelam!
Is the President equating the
opposition to the Divi Neguma Bill (which will give Basil Rajapaksa a
department worth Rs. 80 billion plus an anti-transparency clause) with aiding
separatism? Is he, by extension, claiming that all opponents of the Divi Neguma
Bill, including the Judiciary, are traitors? Is this an indication that the
full force of Rajapaksa-power will be used against all those who impede the
Rajapaksa-way?
Winston Churchill described the
Munich Accord as the ‘first foretaste of a bitter cup’. The attack on the JSC
Secretary is a foretaste of the bitter cup, which awaits us if we fail to
resist the Juggernaut of absolutism and lawlessness. That necessary battle is
the inescapable duty of all those who want to live as citizens in a democracy
rather than become subjects of an ersatz royalty.
