What Sri Lankans really think
Repost This Article
“Seek truth from facts” (Deng Xiaoping)
It is ironic, is it not, that those Western voices and Lankan liberals who believe that there is a democracy wave sweeping the world, that democracy is dying if not dead in Sri Lanka and is in dire need of regime change, do not, for the most part, pause to review or objectively ascertain public opinion in the country? They may not believe that ‘Vox Populi, Vox Dei’ –‘the voice of the people is the voice of God’ — but surely, any adherent or advocate of democracy must know and display some respect for public opinion in what remains a multiparty democracy?
There is an extensive survey of public opinion, the results of which will up-end all conventional assumptions about what the Sri Lankan people think and therefore how they are likely to act or react.
This is the Survey on Democracy in Post-War Sri Lanka, Topline Report July 2011, conducted and published by the Social Indicators unit of the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA), in association with the Friedrich Neumann Stiftung of Germany. Headed by Dr Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, a well-known civil society critic of the administration, the CPA is and has been a trenchant critic of government policy. Therefore, its findings cannot be tainted by association with government. Those findings will, to put it colloquially, blow your socks off.
The media release issued by the CPA with the Report notes that the results reveal a divided society, which is however only one way of looking at it. Given that one of the ethnic communities happens to comprise virtually two thirds of the island’s population, the division is quite uneven, and with uneven consequence. Even more significantly, the statistics show a remarkable degree of congruence between Sinhalese and Tamils on key issues, and a surprisingly positive opinion being held by a fairly large percentage of Tamils on the most contentious and polarising issues.
“On the subject of the general security situation in the country, majority of Sri Lankans think that it has got better in the last two years. 68.2% said it has got a lot better while 23.1% said it has got a little better. When comparing the opinions of respondents across the four communities, it is mostly the Sinhala community (77.5%) and Up country Tamil community (57.8%) who said that the security situation has got a lot better. ”
What is interesting is that the results belie a general assumption about Tamil opinion as a whole. Most critics of the Sri Lankan state and/or the government cherish the belief that the vast majority of Sri Lankan Tamils feel that the security situation has worsened with the heavy presence of the military. However, only “13.2% of the Tamil community said that it has got a lot worse”.
While, understandably, “an overwhelming majority from the Southern Province (98.1%) believe that the general security situation in the country has got better in the last two years, with 75.6% saying that it has got a lot better”, a large percentage of respondents from the Northern Province, as large as 63.9% said “the general security situation …has got better”, though only 10.3% in that Province said “it has got a lot better”. “A majority of Sri Lankans are hopeful about the security situation in the future as 56.4% think that it will get a lot better…”
The solid commitment of the Sri Lankan citizenry to democracy as a system, and rejection of any suggestion of military rule as a form of government, comes through unambiguously in the Survey data. Furthermore, the commitment to democracy is one major issue on which there is NO significant ethnic differentiation, let alone polarisation. In sum, there is a solid nationwide consensus on democracy as a form of rule. “A majority from all four communities (Sinhala – 68.2%, Tamil – 70.3%, Up country Tamil – 70.8%, Muslim 87.8%) stated that democracy is preferable to any other kind of government. 52.7% of Sinhala respondents, 76.3% of Tamil respondents, 71.1% of Up country Tamil respondents and 70.1% of Muslim respondents strongly disagreed with the suggestion of having the army rule a country.”
Interestingly it is the Sinhalese who disagreed most with the notion of a strong, yet undemocratic leader, even if the situation necessitated it. This gives the lie to the Western or Colombo cosmopolitan critique of the Sinhalese, namely that their propensity for authoritarianism and failure to internalise liberal enlightenment values give them a propensity for authoritarian patriarchal leaders , al la Germany in the 1930s, and that this explains the high degree of support for Mahinda Rajapaksa. On the contrary, the statistics show that the Sinhala majority have a strong propensity verging on a vocation, for democracy.
“Having a strong leader who does not have to bother with parliament and elections – Respondents from all four communities mostly disagreed with this statement with 50.7% of the Sinhala community, 44.2% of the Tamil community, 41.7% of Up country Tamil community and 40.3% of the Muslim community strongly disagreeing… Having a democratically elected political leader – Around 80% of those from Sinhala and Tamil communities and around 85% from the Up country Tamil and Muslim communities agreed with this type of leader governing a country. 72.7% of urban respondents and 70.5% of rural respondents said that they strongly agreed with having a democratically elected political leader.” (pp 21-22)
Crucially, there is no support for anything remotely akin to a theocracy, or de-facto quasi theocracy, in which religious leaders would play an overriding, hegemonic or determinant role. This too gives the lie to the Western liberal caricature of Sinhalese and Muslims in political thrall to their respective clergies. Politics, decision making and policy making are a largely secular matter for the majority of the Sri Lankan people.
“Having religious leaders rather than politicians make all major decisions about the country – Around 55% – 60% of respondents from the Sinhala, Tamil and Up Country Tamil communities disagreed with this while disagreement for having religious leaders making all major decisions about the country was lowest among the Muslim respondents with around 40% agreeing (out of which includes 10% who strongly agreed) that they should.” (pp. 21-22)
The advanced character of the civic consciousness of the Sri Lankan people is demonstrated by their preference for a non-military, non-theocratic, civilian, elected democratic leadership, with a more meritocratic, expert driven decision making /policy process.
“Having experts, not government, make decisions according to what they think is best for the country – Agreement was high for this form of governance, with more than 62% of respondents from all four communities agreeing with this statement.” (pp 21-22)
The bulk of the citizenry seem to have no issues with a constructive civilian role of a distributive-development sort, for the military. “Since the end of war, the role of the forces has expanded to include civilian tasks, such as selling vegetables and other economic and recreation activities. More than 55% of the Sinhala, Up country Tamil and Muslim communities approve of this, with 25.3% of the Sinhala community, 28.1% of the Up country Tamil community and 10% of the Muslim community stating their strong approval.” As will be mentioned later, the statistics show a high level of trust among the majority, for the armed forces as an institution.
Contrary to the opinion of critics of Sri Lanka, the people, irrespective of ethnic identities, feel that Sri Lanka is more, not less democratic in the post war period. “Most respondents from all four communities believe that Sri Lanka is now more democratic, with 31.2% of Sinhala, 20.8% of Tamil, 32.8% of Up country Tamil and 33.8% of Muslim respondents stating that Sri Lanka is much more democratic.” Furthermore, the people of all ethnic communities believe that their vote counts, irrespective of all propaganda about vote rigging and stolen elections. The Survey says that “It is noteworthy that most respondents from all four communities believe that their vote has an impact on the outcome of an election.”
Notwithstanding a noteworthy degree of alienation among the Tamil citizens of the Hill Country — most respondents in the Up Country Tamil community (41.2%) believe that they have no say in what the government does—“most in the Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim communities disagreed and believe that they do have a say in what the government does”.
What about the freedom of expression, which most critics yell is being throttled as we speak, or in this case, write? “When asked if in Sri Lanka they are free to express their feelings about politics, irrespective of where they are and who they are with, most of those from the Sinhala community (50%) and Up country Tamil community (38.8%) believe that they are completely free to do so, while a much smaller percentage of the Tamil and Muslim communities believe the same.”
Now, here’s the kicker folks. What do the majority of our citizens say about democracy during the administration of President Mahinda Rajapaksa? Do they believe the view of the local liberals and dissidents that democracy died with the introduction of the 18th amendment which abolished the two term limit? Hardly: “58.8% of Sri Lankans think that the country has been the most democratic under President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s period. This view is shared by 69.9% of Sinhalese respondents. On the other hand, only 23.6% of Tamil respondents, 13.1% of Up country Tamil respondents and 21.9% of Muslim respondents concur.”
A fairly significant portion of the citizens seemed not to have a problem with the abolition of the two term limit either. “42.4% of Sinhalese respondents said that there should be no constitutional limit on how many terms the President can serve – in order to allow strong Presidents to serve the country. 15.2% of Tamil, 21.4% of Up country Tamil and 26.6% of Muslim respondents agreed with the same.”
Let’s get to perhaps the most newsworthy part. Which political party do most Sri Lankans feel closest to? What are the respective strengths of the parties, especially the ruling party and the main Opposition? What are the chances in the foreseeable future of the Opposition? What is the picture in the South and north respectively? The results are striking, stark and massive. There is only one game in town, when it comes to state power, and only one in terms of a North-South dialogue.
“Respondents were asked about which political party (specific party, not alliance) they felt that they are close to. 74% of Sinhalese respondents said the Sri Lanka Freedom Party while 19.8% said the United National Party. 53.9% of Tamil respondents said they felt close to the Illankai Tamil Arasu Kachchi party while 22.4% said the United National Party.”
Thus the inescapable conclusion is that the SLFP under Mahinda Rajapaksa has an unassailable position of support from two thirds of the community that comprises two thirds of the country’s populace, while the UNP under Ranil Wickremasinghe has plummeted to 20% of that community which constitutes the overwhelmingly preponderant majority.
Meanwhile the TNA is not as hegemonic among the Tamils as the SLFP is among the Sinhalese, but it has emerged clearly ahead, and is far more popular among the Tamils than the UNP is among the Sinhalese.
On the problem of a political solution and reconciliation, social opinion does seem divided. “On the topic of a political solution for Sri Lanka’s ethnic problem, 29.7% of Sinhala, 59.1% of Tamil, 30.8% of Up country Tamil and 53.5% of Muslim communities agreed that the Constitution should be changed based on recommendations made by an all party committee to produce a political solution to the country’s ethnic problem. However, 17.6% Sinhala, 4% Tamil, 11.1% Up country Tamil and 14.2% Muslim communities said that there is no need for a political solution as the LTTE was completely defeated militarily. Most respondents from the Tamil (40.9%), Up country Tamil (32.5%) and Muslim (42.9%) communities agree that power needs to be devolved to the Provincial Councils while reducing the power of the central government. Only 15.3% of the Sinhala community concur…On the topic of reconciliation, 32.3% of people from the Tamil community are of the opinion that the government has done nothing with regard to addressing the root causes of the conflict which resulted in thirty years of war. On the other hand, 41.1% of people from the Sinhala community believe that the government has done a lot.”
Though this is an extract from the CPA’s ‘Key Points’ summary, the body of the main text provides the real ‘key’ to the solution: “…On the other hand, 31.3% of Sinhala and around 20% of Tamil, Up country Tamil and Muslim communities stated that it is alright to decentralise certain powers but powers of the central government should not be reduced. Once again, 37% of Sinhala and around 20% of Tamil, Up country Tamil and Muslim respondents said that they have no opinion regarding this.” (pp.23-24)
Paradoxically, the CPA statistics make it easier to formulate a political settlement, because the parameters of the possible are brought into sharp relief. Given the statistics of Sinhala opinion, it is evident that any solution, even one that emanates from a Parliamentary Select Committee, cannot stand the test of public opinion at a national referendum. Such a referendum will become imperative if a proposed solution exceeds the framework of the Constitution. Almost equally clearly, a majority of the majority either support or do not oppose a decentralisation of powers provided those of the central government remain undiminished.
The cold, hard facts revealed by the CPA Survey prescribe the avoidance of Constitutional change drastic enough to reduce, or be credibly perceived (before the Supreme Court, in the first instance) as reducing the powers of the centre and therefore necessitating a referendum. Logic and reality combine to dictate that any political settlement must be limited to that which averts a Sinhala veto at a referendum, i.e. it must remain within the overall framework of the Constitution and must be limited to the actual implementation of its existing provisions for devolution of power to the provinces with perhaps a degree of ‘stretching’ by way of re-adjustment in the list of powers shared concurrently between centre and provinces.
In another surprising development, there is a broad consensus cross cutting ethnic fault lines, and belying the critique by oppositional economists, that the Rajapaksa administration is doing a good job on the macro economy. This of course narrows the political space for the UNP, whose strong suit has been economic growth and development. The Survey states that “Looking at the assessment of the economy, most of the respondents from all four communities believe that the government is doing a good job…50.4% of Sinhala, 49.2% of Tamil, 54.4% of Up country Tamil and 60.6% of Muslim communities agree that the government is doing a good job in managing public services. 71.7% of Sinhala, 74.4% of Tamil, 55.9% of Up country Tamil and 64% of Tamil respondents who said that the Government is doing a good job in managing public services also stated that this favourable opinion increased since the end of war. 5.5% of Sinhala, 2.3 of Tamil, 20.3% of Up country Tamil and 7.9% of Muslim respondents said that it has decreased.”
What of the civic consciousness of the citizenry? What of the levels of social/public trust in institutions? Despite three decades of war, the atrophy of some institutions and the hypertrophy of others, the Survey reveals that “With regard to the level of trust that they have in key institutions, most people from all four communities have some trust in the Central/ National government, their Provincial government, their Local government, civil service, police, parliament and political parties. Most Sinhalese people have a great deal of trust in the army while most of those from the other three communities have some trust. However, 32.8% of people from the Tamil community stated that they have no trust in the army.”
This does not however, mean that the people, including the Sinhala people have no clearly identifiable problems, criticism and grievances. The big issues are those of Human Development or Physical Quality of Life including unemployment, inflation and poverty. The big three are the Cost of living, corruption and unemployment. “65% of Sri Lankans, mostly from the Sinhala community, do not think that corruption can be ignored…According to a majority of the respondents, the most important area the Government needs to pay attention to is the cost of living. When it comes to the second most important area, respondents in the Tamil and Up country Tamil communities said it should be reducing poverty while the Sinhala community said agriculture and the Muslim community said unemployment. When asked about the main results that people would like to see from the current development process, once again cost of living ranks as the top priority for respondents in all four communities. For the Sinhala community, improved infrastructure is the second result they would like to see while for the other three communities it is addressing unemployment and the creation of more jobs. ”
Public opinion is enlightened, across the ethnic communities on the need to prioritise the development of the former conflict areas. “Most respondents from all four communities believe that priority should be given to rebuilding conflict affected areas, with the Tamil (73.6%) and Up country Tamil (65.2%) being the highest among the four communities who think so when compared to the 49.6% of Sinhala respondents and 46.1% of Muslim respondents who believe the same.”The Sri Lankan citizenry displays the same pragmatic enlightenment on two important civic issues, namely women’s representation and the role of the news media. “72.6% said that the news media should constantly investigate and report on corruption and the mistakes made by the government while only 5.6% said that too much reporting on negative events, like corruption, only harms the country… Support for the idea of allocating a fixed quota for women candidates per district at the elections was high among respondents from all four communities.”
Lenin once said that “serious politics begins where tens of millions of people are”. It is therefore very difficult to take seriously, those who try to do serious politics or urge serious political change with no awareness of or respect for the opinions of tens of millions of Sri Lankan people. Perhaps things are simpler still. The best known injunction of the man who launched China’s economic miracle, Chairman Deng Xiaoping, was ‘seek truth from facts’.
So, the international community should conclude that the “sinhalese” overwhelmingly support a Government which says, “What ethnic problem? There is no problem since the LTTE was eliminated”.
Vox Sinhala Vox Psittacus
Vox Jayatilleke Vox Diablo
Hik Hik Hik
Badagini wenakan indimu.
Why “sinhalese” within inverted commas, Ravana? Are they a figment of someone’s imagination? Do they not exist? Why the lower case ‘s’? Are they children of a lesser God? Should the international community not care about their views?
What the international community should do Ravana, is to read the report and understand reality. And it is not just about the Sinhalese , with or without inverts, though it is certainly also about the pronounced views of a vast majority of a vast majority.
By the way, the ‘international community’ also means the vast majority of humanity, and the world’s states, which do not seem to have a problem with the Sinhalese or Sri Lanka.
As for your insinuation that we’ll starve due to international economic sanctions, you’ve forgotten the little matter of Russia and China’s vetoes, and the location of Sri Lanka in vibrant, supportive Asia.
In any case, nobody starves in fertile Sri Lanka, man.
So, dream on.
“Why “sinhalese” within inverted commas, Ravana?”
Let me tell you as succinctly possible, why? In the 1980′s I tried to persuade Tamils that they have the same heritage in common with the “Sinhalese”. They were irreconcilable and implacable. So I gave up. I was resigned to the possibility that Sri Lanka will one day be two nations (even though economically, politically and historically this seemed ridiculous. In the 1990′s genetic evidence also supported my thesis). Then in the late 1990′s, the small matter of “child abduction and recruitment”by the LTTE, turned me (not that I didn’t know they were an evil lot before; but now there were real people whose real children were cannon fodder under the LTTE jackboot. My heart had accept what my brain already said. These are my people.
Go forward a few year and we have the CFA. I told my wife (believing that the country will probably be divided- perhaps as a confederation) “now that the Tamils can be at peace, I can start to help my Sinhala people”. Quick as a flash she retorted “Don’t say that. I’m shocked! That’s racist!!” (my wife like my mother is an unassuming person with great wisdom).
Instantly, I realised how wrong I was. I owed it to all my people. What was sticking in my throat was the LTTE, whom I knew would betray Sri Lankans. Then the Ranil Wickramasinghe Government struck the first blow. By turning Karuna. I could see a gap. A possibility.
The rest is history as Sri Lanka had Sarath Fonseka to carry out professional task of eliminating the LTTE whilst a conglomeration of political forces including RW/UNP, CBK/SLFP, JVP, MR/GR converged to provide him with the support required at various times. Even when most of them (with the exception of JVP) went the wrong way or lacked courage there appeared intense pressure which provided the background to bring it to a close.
For me there was no doubt that a state-force was capable of doing this. However, the reason for supporting the war was that there was a greater prize to be won and a greater struggle for it after the war. The war against tyranny and corruption. This is not just my thought. Sarath Fonseka himself has stated that winning the war was straight forward but that fighting corruption is the greater challenge. There is one more caveat in this story. I like many others whilst supporting the war were more than a little perturbed about the fate of the child soldiers of the LTTE. It was very evident that these kids were pushed to the front lines as cannon-fodder. In Fonsekas own words, his strategy was to hit the strongest points of the LTTE, thus getting a high kill rate of elite LTTE cadres (with the price to be paid with lives of soldiers). We know that there were perhaps 20 000 child recruits. Of these one half were saved by this strategy as evident at the end of the war. I wonder how many more would have been saved if the Rajapkasa’s were not pushed by their masters in mid May?
So to come back to the point after this tortuous course; The “sinhalese” is in inverted commas because, it is not about them. The fight against corruption is always about minorities, the weak, those who need the protection of the powerful.
I said before about the wisdom of my wife. I also have a close group of friends who will not hesitate to point it it out if I ever tread the wrong path. I am blessed with their fierce loyalty.
DJ, are you a good friend to MR? :
“Are they a figment of someone’s imagination? Do they not exist? Why the lower case ‘s’? Are they children of a lesser God? ”
YES; No need to elaborate on this. I have stated why in many comments before. It’s a matter of coming to terms with it. “Nahayen andanna aepaa”.
This is the price you pay for being parrots.
“In any case, nobody starves in fertile Sri Lanka, man.”
I know that you know it was a figure of speech. Let me elaborate with a story.
One winter when it was drawing to a close, as is my usual habit, I stoked up the wood heater in my home before going to sleep. The reason for stoking the fire (which involves filling the cavity with dry hard wood and turing the fan and oxygen off) is that the wood would burn slowly all night leaving red hot embers to restart the fire in the morning. This night I had not kept replacing the wood during the evening. a result the embers were small in amount but still red. When I filled the cavity with large pieces of wood the embers were able to catch fire. I immediately closed the oxygen, expecting that the wood will slowly burn.
The next morning when I came to the wood heater to restart it with new wood, I was alarmed to see that all the wood was still there and the cavity full. The wood had not burnt as expected. But I noticed that there were still embers underneath in a gap. One of the big pieces had continued to burn but just enough to not affect the mass of the piece of wood. I rolled up two sheets of newspaper tightly and inserted them into the gap and lighted them. To my amazement the whole pile of wood lighted up within a space of a few minutes and was glowing red hot within 15 minutes. This would not normally happen with hard wood even if they are dry. There is a good explanation for what happened and would save $1000 per winter from then on.
In the case of Sri Lanka, the analogy is clear. All you need are embers far far smaller in mass than the great pieces of wood. And after a sufficient period all you need is a couple of sheets of newspaper to set it all alight!
Analyse That! BTW, in the great Southern Land called Australia in your favourite Latin, somewhere on the road between the Greatest cities, there is small place/village called “Badagini”. There is a legend that says the name was given by a Sinhala surveyor. You don’t need that legend to know that the Sinhala surveyors and purveyors get hungry all of a sudden!
“it is certainly also about the pronounced views of a vast majority of a vast majority.”
Well, you may have read what I said about the irreconcilable/inconsolable “Tamils” of the 1980′s. At the end of the war, there was a great opportunity for reconciliation to occur. Believe me when I say this. I have the expertise to know this. Sarath Fonseka would have wanted this, much more urgently than the Rajapaksas.
Now with CPA statistics (I have to concede this to you) you have just given the Eelam lobby the final brick in the wall.
This is what I dearly not want to happen. However, we have accept facts. Perhaps the Badagini, or the burning fire will save the day yet. Whatever the case, “sinhalese” are history!
Ha…ha…ha…‘Vox Populi, Vox Dei’ –‘the voice of the people is the voice of God’…was well demonstrated by the Libyan people and the rebels a while ago… http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14611549
…nothing is permanent. Qaddafi ruled for 42 years. Let’s see how long the Brothers & Sons will rule this country.
Lies,dammed lies, and statistics.
@ Leon
It should read as, “Lies, damned lies and Central Bank Statistics…”
Mr Dayan Jayatileka,
public perception and facts need not be necessarily the same.
Lee Kuan Yew said that the public at large cannot understand a complex political or economic argument. Having debated this with many people I, too have come to this same conclusion.
May I ask you what you consider to be the heart of democracy?
My answer is would be the extent to which executive power is held in check and the extent which the Government can be held accountable to its citizens.
We have the trappings of democracy; a parliament, elections etc. But is there any real check on executive power?
Deeds speak louder than words.
Can you provide any examples where this has actually taken place? I can think of none.
“… What is interesting is that the results belie a general assumption about Tamil opinion as a whole. Most critics of the Sri Lankan state and/or the government cherish the belief that the vast majority of Sri Lankan Tamils feel that the security situation has worsened with the heavy presence of the military. However, only “13.2% of the Tamil community said that it has got a lot worse”.”
The above is an example of getting confused over the arithmetic of facts and missing the truth therein.
Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka seems to prefer the arithmetic:
Only 13.2% expressed concern over the oppressive the security situation.
We do not know what exactly the rest (86.8%) said, but let us assume that they were entirely happy with the situation.
So in terms of the pseudo-democracy of numerical superiority it is to be concluded that the Tamils are happy with the security situation: the country is at peace and all is well for all.
But seeking the truth would go along the following lines:
It is obvious that the oppressive security situation directly affects these 13.2%: for them in particular things are not good.
Seeking the truth would try to find out why this is the case.
Seeking the truth in a genuine spirit of democracy would also try to find out what the 86.8% (who though not directly affected) thought about the unfortunate situation that the 13.2% found themselves in.
Perhaps a certain proportion of the 86.8% couldn’t care less, but some do: let us say 1/2 (43.4%) don’t care and 1/2 do: in this case then even the arithmetic would indicate that 56.6% do hold that the oppressive security situation has worsened and is undesirable.
However more than like a much larger proportion that 1/2 do care even if it does not affect them directly.
Do you see Dr. DJ?
There is much more to seeking the truth from facts than just repeating some facts!
Or instead of making assumptions about what Tamils think and feel and pulling numbers out of nowhere, we could stick with what they actually thought: 25.8% said the situation was a lot better and a further 41.2% said it was a little better. 80.8% thought the situation will continue to improve over the next couple of years.
Dear Hikz,
Don’t know where you got your numbers from, but I hope I am right in assuming that you are aware that 25.8% + 41.2% + 80.8% = 147.8% > 100%.
If I have assumed correctly, for the sake of seeking truth from the facts, could you expand on how the different categories overlap?
You might also want to investigate why 19.2% do not think there will be any improvement; etc.
On the other hand my assumption might be wrong!
“Facts are what I repeat” – Yaka, the golaya
So 1 foot on hot ember but 2 hands on ice! Does that mean I am fine? Some thing is wrong here
If you keep switching fast enough between hands and feet, you won’t feel a thing : ) You may get a little dizzy in the process but hey, you’ll feel like it was all pre-1956.
Less than 2000 persons have fully answered questions during the ‘survey’,out of a population of 21 Million sri lankans of whom around two-thirds are registered voters.
This ‘sample’ of less than 2000, is statistically insufficient to reflect the opinion of the voters.
A statistician should have planned this ‘survey’.
The conclusions on the responses are therefore insignificant and invalid.
From Social Indicator:
This study was designed by a team of Researchers which included a statistician. The sample size was determined in order to produce results within a margin of error +/- 3% and to make necessary disaggregation for the analysis intended. In opinion surveys, the minimum sample size required for a particular level of precision does not depend on the population size. In the sense, in a country like Sri Lanka, or even the US or India, polls conducted with a sample of 2000 could generate the results with the same degree of precision. However, if one wanted to make various levels of disaggregation, then the sampling size calculation should take that in to account.
In fact, in polling increasing the sample does not always mean higher the precision as non-sampling error increases with the sample size. This is why sample designing always looks for an optimum sample instead of a maximum sample.
Therefore, the sample size of this study is good enough to produce findings within a 3% error margin at 95% confidence level.