Whither enemies of the state: The political debate in Sri Lanka today
Repost This Article“Unarm, Eros; the long day’s task is done“ – Shakespeare, Antony and Cleopatra, 4.14
The current Sri Lankan political discourse, thin gruel though it is, contains three morsels of content: democracy, the electoral system and national sovereignty. Some question whether the ‘mere fact of elections’ qualifies Sri Lanka, or any country for that matter, as a democracy. The second discussion is on the electoral system. The third debate revolves around human rights and international factors, with some emphasising national sovereignty and the others, democratic rights and freedoms.
Let’s take it head-on. How did the Tamil nationalist cause, its military manifestation crushed and its propaganda arm in self exile, make such a comeback in the form of the TNA resurgence? How can it be in question as to whether the ruling coalition will or will not obtain a two thirds majority, with its game-changing consequences? How was the outcome of the Eastern province election in doubt?
The answer to all these questions is that elections in Sri Lanka can and do make real changes. The people’s vote or if you prefer, the peoples’ (Sinhala, Tamil, Muslim) vote, counts for something more than mere camouflage. If for instance, the UPFA is forced to form an administration with the help of the UNP or the TNA, it will significantly alter the complexion of that administration and its policies. Had Prabhakaran not enforced a boycott of the presidential election of 2005, Sri Lanka’s and his own fate would have been drastically different. What more evidence is needed that what Sri Lanka still has, a multiparty electoral system, is real and worth protecting? Contrary to some nihilist critics of Sri Lanka who demonstrate their illiteracy in political thought, a renowned scholar of democratic theory Prof John Dryzek, confirms that for “…Rousseau, [according to whom] the general will can be ascertained by voting”. (Handbook of Political Theory, SAGE, 2004, p148)
The UPFA promises to change the electoral system and abolish the pernicious procedure of the preference vote. To what intent and purpose, and to be replaced with what? To strengthen the sole decision making power of the party leader in the nomination of the party representatives? The preference vote at least gives the voter the right to indicate his or her preference among the individuals on the party list, and as the Southern PC election showed, that is no small deal, because the electorate does indeed decide against the favourites of the palace or party centre.
We are reassured that the German model will be the replacement, but we do not know what percentage of the seats will be directly elected and what percentage on the basis of PR.
The UPFA’s election propaganda seems a straightforward pitch for a return to the good old days of the pre-JRJ Westminster model. I find that prospect a wee bit chilling when I remember that all the discriminatory legislation that this country witnessed was passed under the old system and virtually none under the combination of PR and the directly and nationally elected Presidency.
The debate on human rights, or, more correctly the levelling of charge and counter-charge, continues, spiced up with the unconfirmed yet persistent report of Indian absenteeism in the NAM statement criticising Ban Ki Moon for his idea of an expert panel to investigate Sri Lankan wrongdoing. If the report of India sitting it out is true, it is truly portentous, but I shall not comment upon it unless and until it is confirmed.
The polarisation on human rights is not very helpful. It seems that some prefer to defend democracy even at the cost of national sovereignty while others prefer to defend national sovereignty even if it means putting violations and erosion of democracy on a back burner. First things first: there are those who believe that in an era of globalisation, national sovereignty, especially that of small states like Sri Lanka, is a fiction. Such people are in denial. It is precisely the inequities of globalisation that has caused a resurgence in the defence of national sovereignty, and if the cosmopolitan critics want to see what national sovereignty is like, let them meditate on Prabhakaran at Nandikadal, where the Sri Lankan state reasserted its sovereignty over its national territory and was stopped by none as it reunified the country, exterminating its armed enemy—despite a multidimensional external campaign involving states, movements, the media, and global civil society. The cosmopolitans underestimate the relative autonomy of the nation, the state and politics.
A mirror-image of these critics is those who over-estimate national sovereignty to the point of ‘absolutising’ it. For them, national sovereignty can be maintained against all comers and at any cost, while any criticism from overseas and any act of international solidarity are seen as neo-colonial violations of sovereignty. The paranoid mentality of such elements, and more dangerously, the spread of such paranoia, is evidenced in the twisted use of the Sinhala language itself, with the introduction of the new term, used in a wholly pejorative sense, to wit, “jaathyantharaya”. In its literal translation it means ‘The International’ as in the marching song of the international workers’ movement, The Internationale, or the Third International or Comintern. However, in current Sri Lankan political usage it means ‘the international factor’ or ‘the international actors/community’, with its abbreviation to ‘the international’ deployed with a totally negative, ominous inflection (‘jathyantharaya’ instead of ‘jathyanthara prajawa or ‘jathyanthara sadhakaya’ or ‘jathyantara kramaya’). These ideologues and apparatchiks do not care if democracy decomposes and rights are robbed, so long as national sovereignty is defended.
So in this sad polarisation, some use democracy to prise open the shield of national sovereignty, while others, their opponents, use national sovereignty as a shield to shroud the ghastliest violations of human rights and democracy. What has the disappearance of Prageeth Eknaligoda have to do with national sovereignty? Why are lamentable wartime practices, explicable as the brutalisation of a thirty years war against a fanatical foe, going unchecked in peacetime, and since its alleged prime wartime practitioner is out of action who is continuing to do this, why—and what does it say about the earlier episodes?
None of this is necessary. National sovereignty and democracy plus human rights can both be protected by the establishment of a strong, internationally credible national commission of human rights. Why not a powerful national human rights commission such as those in the rest of South Asia? Neither the critics nor the defenders of the government take up this slogan: the critics prefer to push against national sovereignty hoping to puncture it and make for external intervention which can catalyse regime change – itself a silly thought because external pressure especially in the case of a small island, only cements the ideology of populist patriotism.  The defenders of the government come up with plans on paper, which totally lack any credibility, local or international. They would prefer not to appoint a powerful national commission invested with resources and comprising independent persons of distinction, even though such a move would take the wind out of the sails of Sri Lanka’s critics in the West and the UN and strengthen our defenders in the global arena, because patriotism is only a device to shield the state and the administration from genuine scrutiny and accountability, even if purely domestic.
While the war was on, it was necessary to err in the direction of the defence of national and state sovereignty in the face of doctrines such as R2P which could have been used to forestall our decisive victory over the Tigers. Today, with the war over almost a year ago, there is no such need to compromise on democracy and human rights, especially when there are solutions that can protect both while not harming national sovereignty. Today, there are no more enemies within Sri Lanka’s borders; the people of Sri Lanka have no enemies among our fellow citizens.
To conclude, the stakes and prospects at Sri Lanka’s elections show that we have a real and resilient democracy, while the debate on human rights, culture, etc reveal that this democracy is still a far cry from the norms of a healthy modern liberal democracy. To me, it really doesn’t matter whether, in a time of peace, the private media get its funding from overseas and to what purpose. After all, the tax payer funds the state media, which according to alarming recent accounts, sponsors extravaganzas at which songs are sung extolling an imaginary monarchy.
Yesterday, at war with the ‘textbook fascist’ Tigers we had to defend the democratic state even when it abused its power. Today we are no longer burdened by that imperative. Today, the right of the state to defend itself can and must be distinguished from the abuse of power by the state even in the exercise of that right. Yesterday we, the country, the people, the state, faced an existential threat; today we do not. Yesterday, when we were at war, certain things mattered; certain polarisations and demarcations, certain walls and drawbridges, were necessary. Today they do not, and what is to be commended is the slogan (sadly observed for too short a while) of no less a fighter against imperialism and for national liberation and the people, than Mao Ze Dong: “Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom! Let A Hundred Schools of Thought Contend!”
Nice article, taking a simultaneous swipe at the NGO elites as well as the ultranationalists.
“We are reassured that the German model will be the replacement, but we do not know what percentage of the seats will be directly elected and what percentage on the basis of PR.”
I think it’s the UNP, not the UPFA which is talking about German model (I find it hard to believe that Mahinda would go for anything German these days, well maybe except for Mercedes-Beinz).
If implemented properly, the German model would be an improvement over the current open-list PR mess which JR intentionally designed to weaken both Parliament and the political parties so that they could not challenge the Executive President. Aside from the feature of both directly elected and (closed-list) PR seats, Germany has the feature of “constructive vote of no-confidence” meaning that the opposition cannot unseat the head of government unless it can simultaneously elect a new one. If properly modified, this system would convey the stability of a Presidential system on a Parliamentary one- no need for constant elections due to no confidence.
Most people see closed party lists as a recipe for party leader autocracy (a la Ranil), but it would actually force the party leadership into making tough decisions in designing the list to be competitive. If the leadership sidelines a popular politician, the system would make it easy for that politician to form a new party that would pare away the original’s votes. In contrast, the open list shields the leadership from these choices (while the National List lets them reward their favorites) and forces the candidates to literally fight it out and ruin party cohesion.
The result is politics based on personality, at the sacrifice of programme.
1. http://www.france24.com/en/20100204-reporters-sri-lanka-tamil-tigers-civil-war-refugees-civilians-return-army-probation (12-minute video)
a.While the government is promoting tourism, it’s downplaying the oppression, inhuman suffering and human rights violations in Northeast.
b.Tamil fishermen are displaced to let Sinhalese fishermen take their place with the protection of an army camp: This is why the visiting EU parliamentarian team was not allowed into the East in June 2008.
c.The journalist is prevented from going to the North at the army checkpoint.
d.IDPs can be interviewed only in the presence of the Army
2. National Peace Council, Article-Great Game29/03/10:” It is better to rely on our own conformity with international law and practices, than on the goodwill of other nations. ”
Enemies are created here:
http://www.france24.com/en/20100204-reporters-sri-lanka-tamil-tigers-civil-war-refugees-civilians-return-army-probation
There is no attempt to transform conflict into reconciliation: According to the President there are NO camps and when challenged he comes up with ridiculous rhetoric:
Is this an attempt for peace or pestilence:
1. http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/srilanka/Troubled-beginning-for-the-released-Tamil-refugees/Article1-524328.aspx/
Troubled beginning for the released Tamil refugees, 28 March 2010:
”The Sri Lankan government claims to have resettled more than 1.9 lakh displaced Tamils. But for thousands of the resettled the problems are far from over; …. the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) in Sri Lanka has suspended the distribution of shelter cash grants to displaced returnees due to shortfalls in funding, latest UN report said last week.”
2. http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/srilanka/The-refugees-and-resettled-Lanka-s-nowhere-people/Article1-520268.aspx/
The refugees and resettled Lanka’s nowhere people, Hindustantimes, 17 March 2010:
‘’On the stretch of the A9 highway between Vavuniya and Jaffna, hundreds of released IDP families have put up flimsy tents or taken shelter in broken houses. After months in camps, they now have the freedom of movement. But little else.”
3. http://transcurrents.com/tc/2010/03/no_funds_to_meet_needs_of_near.html/
No funds to meet needs of nearly 200,000 Northern IDPs due to govt refusal to endorse 2010 action plan, 13 March 2010:
”The funding crisis follows the government’s refusal to endorse the 2010 Common Humanitarian Action Plan (CHAP), authoritative sources said. Produced annually through a collaboration of all major humanitarian assistance groups in the country (including UN agencies), the CHAP is a document listing out priority areas for donor funding along with estimates.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzGj2hYoymo&feature=youtube_gdata
Foreign journalists have to remind President Rajapakse that
i. there are camps and barbed wire….
ii. journalists cannot go without army escort….
Soon after the Presidential election, he’s likely to have forgotten ……….
There are at least 2 nations(no more geographically defined) in this country:
1. One nation: ”Yesterday we, the country, the people, the state, faced an existential threat; today we do not”.
Tourism promotion in the South in France 24 video and yesterday Central Bank Manager laid foundation stone for a Hotel in Jaffna(for 15 yrs, two hotels have been army camps). Dotted in between the tourism drives of the South and the North are camps of the other nation given in 2.
2. Another (disappearing) nation – continuing to face existential threat for 62+ years with democracy as ”armed soldiers, barbed wire and forced applause” (in the video).
It appears that the president is now a helpless victim of the monster he created – the monster of ‘racism’ – brainwashed by the ultranationalists and the militant buddhist clergy.
Now he has to be an apologist for all what is happening – not only in the northeast, but in the south as well.
He is not the man who tried to travel to UN with evidence of human rights violations by a former regime, and was arrested at the airport.
The mindset of the armed forces and the law enforcement agencies is such that they no longer appear to obey his orders. He appears to live in a world of his own with the single minded compulsion to alter the constitution with a 2/3rds majority – first and foremost to enable him to continue for a THIRD term – as was divulged ( & reported ) by a minister recently.He dares not lose the presidential immunity – he knows how CBK was prosecuted & punished in the Waters Edge case.
He also has come to beleive the encomiums heaped daily on him and now beleives that he is the ‘king’ of sri lanka.
Democracy or democrazy? That is the question.
Good friends should tell the President to be better prepared to meet journalists.
http://www.france24.com/en/20100204-reporters-sri-lanka-tamil-tigers-civil-war-refugees-civilians-return-army-probation (12-minute video)
In the Eastern Province,
1. the Tamil families are forcibly evicted from their homes to make room for Sinhalese fishemen who are provided with military protection and new houses, built from the Relief and Reconstruction fund.
2. the election campaigns are conducted with the people sitting within barbed wires and surrounded by gun-totting soldiers.
3. about 1000 people have been employed by the paramiliray-run administration to do the dirty work for the government, and about 5000 with opposing opinions disappeared since then.
http://www.innercitypress.com/un1invictus031710.html
UNITED NATIONS, March 17 — The film “Invictus” was screened at the UN Tuesday night, with a panel discussion afterwards featuring senior UN advisor Nicholas Haysom, formerly Nelson Mandela’s chief legal advisor. Haysom said South Africa was lucky to have Mandela, who gambled his presidency on forging a ‘shared national identify’ unlike in Sudan, Sri Lanka and Iraq.”
“National sovereignty and democracy plus human rights can both be protected by the establishment of a strong, internationally credible national commission of human rights. Why not a powerful national human rights commission such as those in the rest of South Asia? ”
Instead of a powerful National Human Rights Commission which is going to be appointed under a Constitution that does NOT RESPECT Human Rights, let us change the SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE that will respect Human Rights as National Sovereignty and Democracy.
Some suggestions that would help to create a UNIQUE SYSTEM OF GOVERNANCE that would ultimately bring in GOOD GOVERNANCE by showing the way out for injustice, discrimination, oppression and corruption born due and bred by the present system of governance that is mistakenly or mischievously termed as democratic by persons who call themselves political scientists.
Even the demand for devolution needs to be reframed as a demand for democratization that brings government closer to all the people, not just minorities, apart from being made far stronger than the 13th Amendment, which has loopholes allowing the Centre to take back the devolved powers. Along with the demand for abolition of the Executive Presidency, and further devolution to smaller units, it would give all the people of Sri Lanka more control over their lives, instead of having their lives ruled by a remote power in Colombo that knows little and cares less about their needs”.
So, it is high-time we start to RETHINK in terms of a solution that would address the ASPIRATIONS ALL THE PEOPLE in the country, not just the aspirations of the Tamils, in a just and meaningful way rather than continue to criticize other people for their “faults
A UNIQUE concept that moves towards a meaningful and just power-sharing arrangement (not devolution) based on true democracy – a large number of people participating in the governance of the country based on equality, equity – is a great deviation from the usual thinking of the meaning of the word “sharing of power” is given below for the perusal and comments of concerned people.
The best political solution to address the problems faced by various sections of the Sri Lankan society – particularly the poor, the politically weak and the “minorities” of various categories’ who do not carry any “political weight” – would be to DILUTE the powers of all elected representatives of the people by separating the various powers of the Parliament and by horizontally empowering different sets of people’s representatives elected on different area basis to administer the different sets of the separated powers at different locations.
It has to be devolution HORIZONTALLY where each and every set of representatives would be in the SAME LEVEL as equals and in par and NOT VERTICALLY, where one set of representatives would be above (more powerful than) the other, which is the normal adopted practice when talking of devolution, in this power-hungry world. It is because “devolution of power” has been evolved “vertically”, we have all the trouble in this power-hungry world. So, for sustainable peace it should not be the present form of “devolution of power” but “dilution of powers” or “meaningful sharing of powers” in such a way that no single person or single set of people’s representatives be “superior” to another.
This system would help to eradicate injustice, discrimination, corruption and oppression – the four pillars of an evil society – and help to establish the “Rule of Law” and “Rule by ALL” for sustainable peace, tranquility and prosperity and a pleasant harmonious living with dignity and respect for all the inhabitants in the country. Everyone must have similar powers, rights, duties and responsibilities and most importantly everyone should be deemed “equal” and treated “equitably” before the law not only on paper but also practically – be it the Head of State, The Chief Justice or the voiceless poor of the poorest in the country.
Since all political and other powers flow from the sovereignty of the people, it is proposed herein that these powers be not given to any ONE set of representatives but distributed among different sets of people’s representatives (groups) elected on different area basis (village and villages grouped) to perform the different, defined and distinct functions of one and the same institution – the Parliament – like the organs of our body – heart, lungs, kidneys, eyes, nose, ear etc. – performing different and distinct functions to enable us to sustain normal life.
In these suggestions the powers of Parliament have been so separated and distributed among different sets of people’s representatives in different areas so as to dilute the powers of an individual representative or that of a set of representatives in any area. (Dilution is better than Devolution)
The set of representatives elected and empowered to perform a function in an area by the people of that area must be restricted to that function only and in that area only and must be forbidden from interfering with the functions entrusted to another set of representatives similarly elected and empowered.
Say a set of representatives elected and empowered to enact laws for the smooth administration of the country must be forbidden from interfering in the functions of the set of representatives elected and empowered to administer a region within those laws or in the functions of the set of representatives elected and empowered to implement approved development projects in an area, or with the functions of the set of representatives elected and empowered for the fiscal management of the country or with the functions of the representatives elected and empowered to plan the development of an area and so on and so forth in respect of other functions of the parliament.
Through this system of representation and empowerment – different sets of representatives in different areas elected and empowered by different groups of people to implement different ‘distinct and defined’ functions of one and the same parliament – “corruption” in any form and at any level cannot easily arise. If there is no “corruption” then the Rule of Law will prevail making way for peace and good governance in the country, which is the need of the inhabitants of a country.
In my humble opinion this new concept of democracy while delivering good governance would preserve the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country and guarantee the due respect and dignity of the people – both collectively and individually, who are, under the present system, treated as their “subjects” by the “ruling class”.
To be more explicit the concept is explained below:
1. A group elected and empowered or entrusted to enact laws for good governance, taxation and connected affairs (One Group functioning at National level and elected on district basis).
2. A group elected and empowered or entrusted to generally manage the finances of the country including collection and disbursement of revenue on the basis of the laws enacted by group 1 above, national planning and connected affairs in consultation with other groups. (One Group functioning at National level and elected on regional basis).
3. Groups elected and empowered or entrusted to administer different regions of the country and approve project proposals submitted (Groups functioning at Regional level and elected on divisional basis).
4. Groups elected and empowered or entrusted with the functions to prepare and submit project proposals based on the needs of that village for confirmation (Groups functioning at Village level and elected on village basis).
5. Groups elected and empowered or entrusted to implement approved project proposals formulated by Group 4 and confirmed by Group 6 with funds provided by Group 2 through Group 3. (Groups functioning at District level and elected on sub-divisional basis).
6. Groups elected and empowered or entrusted to coordinate and confirm project proposals submitted by Group 4 (Groups functioning at Sub-divisional level and elected on village basis).
7. Groups elected and empowered or entrusted to monitor the functions of all groups for transparency, accountability and irregularities with an eye on the elimination of injustice, discrimination and corruption. (Groups functioning at Divisional level and elected on village basis).
All the above groups and individuals in the Groups enjoy parity of status as they are part and parcel of one and the same institution – the Parliament.
In the existing system, elections are being held for four different institutions or four different establishments with the functions overlapping and connected vertically with one above or below the other – Executive President, Parliament, Provincial Councils and Pradeshiya Sabahs – and while one institution controls another, it is dependent and/or is a competitor to the institution next or all others. But in the new concept it is entirely different –different groups are elected on different area basis to perform different functions – of the same institution, the Parliament – that do not overlap and all these groups enjoy parity of status since they are connected horizontally and are part and parcel of one and the same institution – the Parliament.
There would be only one institution – the Parliament – that would satisfactorily govern the entire country and thus reduce the financial burden and cumbersome bureaucracy while increasing all round efficiency coupled with streamlined speedy development, resulting in the thunderous prosperity of the country with a pleasant and happy living to all its inhabitants
Election and Composition: Every area would be a multi-member electorate electing a minimum of two members. Members of the various Councils would be elected from among those residing within that area on “first passed the post” basis subject to gender and age group conditions being fulfilled and where necessary and possible trade, political ideologies and ethnicity being considered. The number of members of any one gender or age group shall be a minimum of 20% of the total to be elected from an area to a Council and at least one member from other ethnic minorities if they form more than 10% of the eligible voters. The members so elected would be considered as independents.. The number of elected members in a given Council – other than Groups 1, 2 & 4 – would vary from Region to Region depending on the number of sub-administrative areas in that region, governed by the principle of equal number of members to the same or similar councils from similar areas – irrespective of the size and population of the area concerned. (Similar to the principle applied in the election to the Senate in the US – two members per State and in the UN one member per country/administrative area).
Eligibility: No person shall be eligible to contest or to become a member of a Council if he/she had been a member of that council within the last two years immediately preceding the date of nomination. He/she shall be eligible to contest to any other Council. This clause shall apply to all members of his/her immediate family. Only one member in a family can seek election to any of the councils at any one time. A person cannot serve for more than two terms and in more than two councils during his/her life-time.
A person while holding a ‘post’ in the government or government controlled institutions or public limited liability companies quoted in the Stock Exchange shall not be eligible to seek election to any Council.
The term: (period) of all councils shall be four years and elections should be held only once in every four years and dates to be fixed in the constitution itself as in the U.S.A. with a succession clause to fill any vacancy that might occur in between two election dates.
Responsibility: Any individual or group or groups of individuals violating any of the provisions in the constitution shall be personally held responsible for same and dealt with suitably.
Independent Commissions: shall be appointed for the proper administration and control of the various services that have to function independently according to laid down procedures. These commissions are accountable and answerable to the Head of State. Interference in the functions of any Commission in any way by anyone including the Head of State, Heads of Councils or any member of any Council shall be considered as a violation of the Constitution and be dealt with suitably.
Composition of Independent Commissions: Every commission shall consist of one member from each of the Regions elected jointly by the members of the Regional and other Councils of each Region. The members of both National Councils (Groups 1& 2) shall jointly elect a member of any Commission, who shall be the Chairman.
The Head of State: The Head of one Region will act as the Head of State along with the Deputy Head of another Region as the Deputy Head of State for a period one year with the Heads and Deputy Heads/Assistant Heads of the other Regions taking their turns in rotation. If the Deputy Head of one Region happens to belong to the same ethnic group as that of the Head of Region who is acting as the Head of State then the Assistant Head of that Region would act as the Deputy Head of State. The Head of State and his/her Deputy would be guided by the Executive Council in their actions and would have the powers and responsibilities similar to that of a Head of State of a country where the Parliament is supreme. (India and Malaysia might be quoted as examples.). The Head of State is accountable to the Executive Council (Group 2). In any Region, the Head of Region and the Deputy Head of Region shall not belong to the same ethnicity IF that region has a population of more than 10% belonging to other ethnicities.
The constitution has to be amended to include the above suggestions as modified. Please feel free to comment or request for any clarifications. Many suggestions that need consideration have been left out herein but would be included as the discussion proceeds.
Comments, objections, constructive criticisms of any short comings or defects in the above suggestions and suggesting suitable remedies to end present deplorable state of affairs are most welcome and may pleas be addressed to sie.kathieravelu@gmail.com
Since all political and other powers flow from the sovereignty of the people, it is proposed herein that these powers be not given to any ONE set of representatives but distributed among different sets of people’s representatives (groups) elected on different area basis (village and villages grouped) to perform the different, defined and distinct functions of one and the same institution – the Parliament – like the organs of our body – heart, lungs, kidneys, eyes, nose, ear etc. – performing different and distinct functions to enable us to sustain normal life.
http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=6056&l=1
Development Assistance and Conflict in Sri Lanka: Lessons from the Eastern Province, Asia Report N°165, 16 April 2009
”The east continues to face obstacles to economic and political progress and offers lessons for development agencies and foreign donors considering expanding their work into newly won areas in the Northern Province.”
http://www.thesundayleader.lk/20090927/onthespot-1.HTM
Back to Batticaloa, 27 September 2009:
”…. Another living reminder of the east’s dark past are the refugees. Of course it was announced that all the east’s refugees had been resettled and allowed to return home months ago. But as ever things are not quite what they are announced to be. While the vast majority of refuges have returned – there is a single but crucial exception – hundreds of families evicted from their homes in Sampur remain trapped in the tented limbo of IDP camps outside of Batticaloa. The Sampur refugees sweltering in their tin roofed temporary homes reveal both the duplicity and concealment of the government and the failure of the media who distracted by various other issues have failed to follow up on this painful but profoundly important case. …..”
: ”Yesterday we, the country, the people, the state, faced an existential threat; today we do not”.
In Sri Lanka, there are only two types of people: privileged and not-so-privileged.
The President is the king of two countries: one he can rule without the help of an army(=democracy) and the other he can rule only with the help of an army.
The solution is personal – not collective. This has to be our primary site of engagement until we are able to raise ourselves by our bootstraps – raise ourselves out of this stinking marsh we have got ourselves into. If this is too strong a way to put it let me say that we now cannot conceive of any collective solution which is not deeply rooted in a personal and self changing approach.
Let me clarify at once what I mean by the self. It is not a self that withdraws from society to live in glorified isolation. Such a course of action is not possible. Even in the deep forest you are never alone. You must live in harmony with the animals around you. If not they will reject you. Thus the self I refer to is one that seeks both self reflection and social harmony – seeing that they are both needed to develop wisdom and compassion. Saraha said:
He who clings to the void
And neglects compassion
Does not reach the highest stage
But he who practices only compassion
Does not gain release from the toils of existence
It is balance that we seek – and this can be translated at once to a balance between a personal and collective vision.
We have now passed the stage where a collective solution could be adopted and the required personal commitment assumed.
For example we would like a return of democracy or the rule of law. These things have collapsed because we have gone beyond the minimum level of personal commitment required to sustain these principles. We are no longer a society bound by any common values. Our institutional structure has collapsed because of the absence of personal commitment.
What do I mean by personal commitment? I know a lot of my fellow citizens are under the delusion that they have personal commitment. They may have commitment but it is not personal. It is personal when you accept that the garbage we criticize ‘out there’ is also within us and we resolve to clean up our own act as part of a total clean up exercise. It means that in times of deep national crisis we ask ourselves the questions – where did I go wrong and how can I put it right? It is not whether you chose the right argument in your last article but whether you have kept faith with the fundamental principles of honesty and kindness that link each one of us as human beings. It is whether you have also contributed in some measure to the moral decline in society.
The true extent of our collective failure is this. We have not only allowed our collective consensus to disappear but we have also removed the whole issue of personal morality and commitment out of the national conversation. The concept of blame has effectively removed the ideas of honesty and personal duty. This is the zenith of frivolousness – a state of affairs that is being camouflaged by pseudo intellectual discussions.
You must be INVOLVED to EVOLVE. Where values are involved we must not surrender our power and duty as human beings to anyone else. Let me give a couple of examples from the discussion on the death penalty.
Statement from Amnesty website: ‘The death penalty has no place in a modern criminal justice system. The death penalty is not an effective deterrent. Because all judicial systems make mistakes and because of its irrevocable nature, the death penalty kills innocent individuals who are wrongly convicted. The death penalty brutalises society and breeds contempt for human life.’
Contribution by a Sri Lankan Attorney to a local debate: If I cannot bring myself to kill a fellow human being, if I cannot squeeze his neck and watch him die, I cannot in all honesty encourage another to do it or stand by and watch.
None of the reasons given by Amnesty International touch the heart of the matter. The question is what would you do? How would you act as a human being? These are the questions we must ask ourselves. Not whether a course of action serves some vague notion of public good. The depth at which you can touch others is the depth you have reached in your own being.
As a nation we are now looking forward to a consensus without commitment. For us democracy and all allied freedoms are not really things of value. They are mere conveniences for us and we cry like little children whose toys have been taken away. This is the depth of our immorality. We must understand now that we have a fight on our hands – a fight for our freedoms – and we will no longer get something for nothing. We have no representatives but ourselves to rely on and there is no one else who will sacrifice their blood sweat and tears for us. We must now come out with our own.
All that is good in us
Bounded by a circle
Of self centered thought
Break it open
Break free
Go beyond
How much longer must we
Wander around
This circle of the narrow self
This samsara –
Creation of our heena manaya
Inflated egos
Smiling at us
From giant hoardings
Different faces
But one mind
Driven by this incessant hunger
For wealth and power
Recognize your face there
The suffering we share
Stop holding on
Let go …
“Soldiers did not permit journalists who attended the rally to speak to voters after the president spoke.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/01/AR2010040101464.html
Oops, democracy …
Enemies of the state were created by the silence of Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and Christians when a lion was given a sword with the sharp edge pointing forward on the flag of the state.
There are some other flags with multiple colours, wheel, moons, stars ……
I hope the future generation takes out the sword and have peace and harmony.
It’s bad enough for human species with the well-developed brain to have weapons of destruction.
It’s worse and heartless to give other species our destructive weapons.