| by Gajalakshmi Paramasivam
( January 22, 2013, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) Recent events in Sri Lanka have confirmed yet again the need for restructure of Public Administrative systems and facilities to reflect the true investment we have all made into the pool of Governance. The most natural structure known to us is the family structure. If we appreciate the true workings of a family, it would be easier for us to appreciate the workings of national governments including the judiciary. Elected members are the parallels of parents in a family. Judiciary are the parallels of other parents (uncles and aunts) in the family in a hierarchical system and other parents in wider community in a democratic system.
I do believe that each one of us has the capability to live ‘freely’ and we would if we remained within our Truth. Others may attribute debit or credit to us – as per their thoughts. But when we remain in our Truth – we would recognize as part of us only those who are personifications of that Truth. Once an Australian lady of Italian origin said to me that she believed that we had both – the male as well as female aspects within ourselves. In Hinduism we have this personification of Lord Shiva-Parvathi – as half male and half female. That personification is specifically known as Arthanaatheeswarar form. I do believe that we have both sides of any relationship within us. They are the only real forms of our true investment in a relationship. Once we take our official side the rest gets given for of the person on the other side. The other person in physical occupation of that side may or may not fit our investment. If as per our discovery through that relationship, the other side is yet to truly fit that other part of our investment – we would fill the gap and that way we operate naturally to give full credit to our true investment. It is for this reason that we develop ‘common resource pools’ within families. Those who operate through Love would naturally be the nucleus of that common pool from which we draw. Such a family would progress quickly to govern itself. The person who contributes most into this natural common pool is the highest facility for the rest. When majority in a group are able to pay as per their ability and draw on this facility – as per their need – we have the Do-It-Yourself /Pay-As-You-Go/Earn systems. Also my Australia, my Sri Lanka, my Bus and my Train facilities. Those who draw more than their need and/or earnings are not entitled to use ‘my’ in front of the whole but stick only to their part – such as my White Australia, my Sinhala Nation, my seat etc.
Parents as they mature become such common facilities to the extent they feel Love for their children and/or have truly contributed without return expectations to their common family structure. To the extent a parent expects returns more than her/his contribution to the common pool – the parent loses status and becomes dependent on the child – irrespective of whether this is expressed or not. Such a parent would not have been truly independent of the child when the child turned 18.
What counts here is that the contribution ought to be to the common pool and not between individuals. This common pool is usually arranged to give structure – lateral as well as hierarchical - and hence we have positions and relationships through that structure. The stronger the common pool the more reliable is the ‘system’ formed to represent the fullness to which that common pool expand. From time to time, the systems need to be restructured to strengthen this common pool. If juniors in a relationship contribute more than seniors, then that relationship needs to be equally divided – as happened in marriages and now in parent-child relationships also. Parents who seek to actively participate in the current life of their children need to voluntarily sacrifice their higher status and become democratic. In natural relationships the lowest level of a parent ought to be equal to the child. To go further down would be damaging to the society that that family is a part of. Naturally high part of the relationship should not be seen to be lower than the other. Towards this, once the two sides to a hierarchical relationship become ‘equal’ the structure most move towards producing objectively measurable outcomes where common outcomes are not possible. Hence transparency.
If the person in the higher position in a relationship has invested less than we have invested in our lower position but tried to enforce their ways by using higher official status – then there is risk of enforcement and damage to freedom and therefore to our investment in common. This happens in a nicer way when parents become dependents on their children due to desire for current benefits that the children seem to enjoy. I find this to be a real problem with senior migrants sponsored by their children. It’s worse when those migrants start ‘telling’ other independent migrant relatives and community members – what to do. Parents who migrated on the basis of real need – whether they were sponsored by their children or otherwise, have less of a risk in this regard. To the extent they stay within the limits where that need was satisfied – there is no risk of them contributing to the deterioration of parent-child relationship which is the root of all relationships.
The above apply also between Governments and Citizens.
I brought legal action against Mr. John Howard also. Mr. Howard was the Prime Minister during the time I complained and the Administration failed to take action. If I had calculated as to what would happen – I am not likely to have taken action. But at that time my pain was too strong for me to think logically. All I knew was it was genuine but as per my calculations followed by belief it did not belong to me. I wrote to Mr. Howard in 1999 that unless migrant issues were addressed – I feared bloodbath for Australia – as had happened in Sri Lanka. There was no response from Mr. Howard but passages from that letter were read out in Court - by the Barrister representing Mr. Howard. As was to be expected from the Australian reality – I lost in court. No, I did not cry over that loss but felt that I had submitted it to the person whose duty it was to ensure the practice of Equal Opportunity at national level. Later when Mr. Howard was with President Bush during 9/11 followed by Bali bombing where majority victims were from my home suburb of Coogee - I felt that my powers submitted to the Highest Authority through my belief – had worked to uphold the Truth. This is how we use the system as a ‘facility’ – as per our investment in the higher side of a relationship occupied by someone who is yet to reach that height of the investment made by us. That is the confirmation of independence – including from status as the winner. I was able to submit at early stage because those around me at the workplace and in the community did not seem to be affected either way. Some who were affected did not have enough powers to influence the higher officials and hence it was not difficult to submit and free myself of expectations from the ‘system’ at an early stage. This is the value of minorities who feel greater sense of ownership than custodians of power driven by benefits.
In the current Sri Lankan situation, citizens who feel that their parents (elected politicians) have invested less than they in governance – have the right to operate as a facility. If Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake therefore submits her higher investment for which she did not derive benefits – to her position as a citizen, she would lead the ordinary citizen without portfolio to govern her/himself. In real terms the Sri Lankan system is less democratic than the Western nations from which supporters of Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake draw their strength. These are the common pools of democratic wisdom from which anyone could draw as per their real needs. But that on its own does not make Sri Lankan system of Justice Administration democratic. Any expectations of equality and independence by Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake and her supporters is not a reality in Sri Lanka. But to the extent they are genuine – it would be easy to convert the investment to political power as a citizen and produce outcomes that confirm democracy. This I believe is also the way forward for Tamils.
 Recent events in Sri Lanka have confirmed yet agai...){kind=link}