I was delighted when asked to review Right of Way: A journey of resettlement by Sharni Jayawardena and published by the Centre for Poverty Analysis (CEPA). Sharni’s skill in photography is enviable, and was the co-creator of Walkabout: Slave Island, supported by Groundviews. At the time of review, the publication was not in the public domain, and given what I had seen of Sharni’s previous work, I expected it to be a largely photographic record, in a coffee table book format, of the human displacement that occurred as a result of the E01, Sri Lanka’s first highway. And yet the book features few photos. 72 pages long, the book has just 8 photos included in it. I’ll come back to why I think this makes for a less compelling way of grappling with what the book sets out to do.

Thousands, since E01 opened late last year, have taken the highway to Galle from Kottawa. The focus when on the road, particularly if one is driving, is on safety at 100kmp/h. In its early days, the highway was a high-speed slalom of road kill and stray dogs. Today, even a driver is more at ease to take in, especially if driving around sun-rise, the spectacular beauty of the countryside the E01 snakes through, without the visual pollution of billboards.  Few if any would have given even passing thought to the issue this book deals with – the displacement of thousands to make way for the highway. The book’s aims are three-fold. One, it “is an attempt to document what happened to the people who had to move, and the different impacts the project had on their lives. It is based on a structured monitoring process carried out over four years, that involved a survey of 400 households, more than 30 group discussions with affected households, and over 450 individual interviews with residents, experts, local government officials and donors” (page v). Two, it attempts to show how “the Road Development Authority, comprising engineers whose primary task was supervising the road building, also implemented the project’s social programmes, often under difficult and contentious circumstances, working with a diverse group of people who, as in any real-life situation, acted and reacted in diverse ways” (page v). Finally, “it attempts to visualise the place and circumstances as it used to be, before the road came” (page vi). The first and second aims are achieved far more than the third.

Sharni’s style is easy to grasp, avoids jargon, convoluted sentences or arcane references.  Right of Way is very readable, well researched and insightful. It sees the E01 through the perspectives of those who are affected by its development – the families forced to relocate and in some cases, live close to a highway on which traffic volume will continue to grow with little or no benefit to those passed by at 100kmph. Sharni quotes the statistics, but what the book does is to go beyond the numbers and through personal narratives, humanise these vexed issues. The statistics alone are revealing. As the book notes,

“An estimated 1,338 families were displaced by the Southern Transport Development Project (STDP), of which 509 families obtained land in 32 sites provided and developed by the Road Development Authority (RDA). This figure would have been much higher if the project had not made a deliberate attempt to avoid highly populated areas, sometimes though at considerable cost to the environment as well as to agriculture. Much of the land acquired was agricultural; consisting of paddy, tea, rubber and cinnamon cultivation, and close to 4,000 households were affected due to loss of their landholdings. In addition, about 550 households were indirectly affected.” (Page 3)

Even approximately, the number of those affected in some way by the development of the E01 is mind-boggling. At a conservative 4 members per family, around 5,300 children, women and men were displaced. Another 4,000 had their incomes disrupted, and their livelihoods placed at risk. It’s currently 400 rupees one-way from Kottawa to Galle or back on the E01. Few of us give a second thought to paying that amount. Sharni’s research highlights the hidden costs of E01’s development, where to date, families that had for generations lived where they did, had stable income, well-established business and fecund land were forced to give it all up. It’s a humbling, vital narrative. Sharni deals with the history of how the E01 came about, but the process and politics of compensation, relocation are the book’s most important contribution to public record. It is unclear, as the book itself notes at the end, how much of what was employed during the construction of the E01 to deal with displacement feeds into current and future mega-development projects. Recording and sharing failures as much as lessons learnt is vital, but it’s also quite obvious that neither is done well in Sri Lanka. And yet, the book flags what was done well, and the innovation – not just in terms of mechanical engineering but also in terms of compensation and responsiveness to human displacement – seen during the construction of the highway. As it notes,

“The project’s Resettlement Implementation Plan (RIP) took a radical departure from Sri Lankan law on land acquisition, compensation and resettlement and the Land Acquisition and Resettlement Committee (LARC) could be considered its most important mechanism. LARC was notably different from the instrument the State usually turns to when it wants to acquire private land for public purposes – the Land Acquisition Act (LAA) No. 9 of 1950. A key difference is that the LAA does not deal with the broader issues of restoring livelihoods or living standards of the displaced people.” (Page 9)

The book goes into great detail about LARC, and the legal aspects aside, it’s interesting to take-away from this example how, if government authorities set their mind to it, they can choose to be more citizen-centric and less heavy-handed in their approaches. The research brings out some notable facts with broader implications. For example, in negotiating compensation, the report notes that the LARC process “especially benefited two contrasting groups: households seen by the Committee to be particularly vulnerable and households with well-informed family members who were able to convincingly argue their cases.” This has implications for Right to Information legislation for example, where vulnerable people through access to information are better able to negotiate with higher authorities, and all communities stand to benefit from more accessible information on governance. Perhaps more expensive for government in the long run, but the fear of heightened public spending over compensation is its own potent mechanism for better developmental planning and strategies. Sharni deals with the complex process of compensation and appeals, particularly for those displaced, extremely comprehensively. Particularly with regard to the exact sum of compensation, there is great scope when reading through the book for the development of decision support systems that aid both government and citizens, on the lines of Smartsettle.com for example. Sharni examines in detail the constitution, efficiency and effectiveness of bodies like the Grievance Redress Committees (GRCs) and the so-called Super LARC, a process of appeal. On page 17 there is a very interesting breakdown of the type of households that fed into the sample that the report is based on. More could have been done with this data. For example, there’s no comparison between the compensation first offered to and subsequently agreed upon by male and female headed households, the working assumption being that a male headed household would have a higher median than a female headed household. The report itself flags this,

“But there were some instances where female householders perceived that they were not taken seriously simply because they were women. “My husband was abroad when the acquisition took place and I had to deal with it until he came down. I think they paid us less compensation because I am a woman.” (Householder, female, age 39, 2006)” (Page 21)

There is however no further study of this in the report, which is a gap. I could also find no explanation as to how and who exactly, for the E01 project, defined what was an ‘extremely vulnerable household’. The term is often used by never clearly explained. There are other shortcomings. A trivial one is the strange inclusion of a Sinhala phrase (Honda sahayogayak dunna) in the excerpt of two female householders on page 22, when the entire book is in English, even though the responses would have been largely if not all in Sinhala. Not clear why Sharni thought it fit to keep this one phrase in. More seriously, gaps emerge in comparative analysis. On page 22 the book notes,

“About 60% of the displaced householders opted to move into other plots they owned or to buy a new plot. The project also provided 32 resettlement sites, which was the preferred choice for relocation of the balance 40% of displaced householders, who did not have a viable alternative or could not afford to purchase land.”

There is however no study into whether the resettlement sites identified and offered by the RDA where better (infrastructure facilities, quality of construction) than the plots and areas selected by the affected families, that on their behalf, the RDA negotiated the purchase of. Again, Sharni deals with what appears to be significant variance in passing, noting on page 33 that,

“The infrastructure facilities at resettlement sites are generally well developed, even if this development did not always take place at a consistent pace. However, there seems to be some differences in the quality of the infrastructure provided both within and across sites, often due to factors that could not be immediately dealt with by the project.”

Highlighting the nuanced interplay, the study of caste, gender, profession, skill, neighbours and a sense of home by Sharni make the book more interesting than just a cold survey of numbers and statistics. Yet we don’t find the voices of youth and children. From memory, the youngest voice reflected in the book is 30. How the youth feel about development and displacement is vital to how the E01 will be perceived and used in the years to come, and arguably more important to record than the opinion of a septuagenarian farmer. Through the book, graphs underscore points Sharni flags in the text, but on page 36, there is an illustration with smiley faces that is impossible to fathom. Some of the smiley faces are truncated, it is not clear what the two stick figures holding hands represent or what the unit of measurement is for a smiley face that is whole. It is noted in the book that there is a definite drop in productivity related to all crops as a consequence of relocation. This is a major economic and existential challenge, and yet the book doesn’t explain, how, if to any degree, local chambers of commerce and industry have stepped into help and support SMEs and farmers during and after the construction of the E01.

Sharni notes that during the 10+ years it took to build the E01, “People had to live for an extended period of time with severe air and noise pollution, and vibrations caused by blasting, compaction, pilling, and heavy vehicle movement.” Driving down it now, you don’t even think of this. But the scale of this air, noise and visual pollution is many times more than the ruckus and fuss we create when there’s a pavement been made, or a road re-tarred in our own neighbourhoods. It’s hard to imagine how it must have been for those close to and living in this maddening environment for so long. The last chapter deals with how the best features of dealing with resettlement, relocation, displacement, compensation and grievance mechanisms around the E01 can and must be more broader applied. It is unclear whether author or publisher intend to follow up on the E01 development beyond Galle, and revisit this study and the sample base say 10 years hence, to ascertain to what degree lives, livelihoods and perceptions had changed.

Right of Way is a genuinely useful contribution to the sadly sparse debate on balancing infrastructure development with human development, and how the former is often ill-secured by an insensitive, centrist, obdurate approach to the latter. I do wish however the book played to Sharni’s strengths as photographer more, or as much as her skill in writing. CEPA itself has the model. As Kannan Arunasalam notes, “CEPA’s photography ‘policy’, an informal understanding which came about as a reaction to the way ‘poor people’ are generally photographed by photojournalists and development organisations, taken without thinking of their rights to privacy and profiting from the use of their ‘faces’, was another challenge that we needed to creatively work around.” Kannan went on to create To Escape or Maximise: The estate worker’s dilemma, CEPA’s first audio visual ‘think piece’, aiming to communicate the findings of its substantial research on the plantation sectors of Sri Lanka to a wider audience. It is a compelling presentation of a complex issue through photography. I wonder why a similar model wasn’t used for this book. CEPA and Sharni could have also gone beyond, and given those affected their own (cheap) cameras to document, through their own eyes and process of selection, the change in their lives brought about by the construction of the E01. Juxtaposed and curated, this could have been a marvellous photographic essay and collection, mediated not through Sharni’s occasional visits and eye, but by those at the heart of the issue the book deals with. Such an approach would have made it far more effective in the book’s avowed goal of being a visual record of the E01’s development.

Yet warts and all, Sharni through this book brings to light a distressing world beyond the dotted lines usually followed on the E01, and the blur of lush green. Sharni ends the book by noting that,

“When we take to the expressway, perhaps we should spare a thought for the many who gave up their rights over this land – their right to use it as a home, a business a cultivation – to allow others the right to travel on an expressway.”

I couldn’t help but think after I read Right of Way cover to cover that it’s not really our right to travel on the E01, but more a privilege we enjoy only because of the real, incredibly hard and on-going sacrifices of those who lands we traverse in our vehicles.

Let they not be forgotten.

• The Incomplete Thombu: A compelling interlace of architecture, drawing, memory and art
• Homeless in one’s homeland
• The Muslim question and resettlement of Muslim IDPs in post-war Sri Lanka: Two comprehensive interviews
• Human displacement
• Forcible resettlements in East

Photo courtesy www.facebook.com/battipeople

Over the last two days, torrential rainstorms in the Central and Eastern province have caused severe flooding, landslides and an overwhelming humanitarian crisis with 758,000 people affected island-wide (according to the latest update at 7:14AM today from the Disaster Mangement Centre [via JNW]) 809 houses have been fully damaged and 2948 houses have been partially damaged. There have been nine deaths; nine injuries and four people are still missing (last update Sunday evening.)

An article in the Daily Mirror details the extent of the crisis,

According to the Centre (Disaster Management) some 55,936 families belonging to 14,519 families have been displaced and had been housed at 138 camps that have been opened.  Several Divisional Secretariat offices in the East were also reportedly under water while Badulla District Secretary Keerthi Disasnayake was also reportedly marooned as a result of a land slide which occurred along the Badulla-Mahinyangana Road.

The following areas in the country have been affected by the floods: Batticaloa, Polonnaruwa, Nuwara Eliya, Moneragala, Badulla, Kegalle and Kandy.

The Sri Lankan Army, Air Force and Navy have deployed teams for immediate rescue and relief operations. The latest update by Daily Mirror reveals that the Air Force has rescued 22 people that were stranded in the Thoppigala area and 1500 SLA troops have been deployed in the east to assist with rescue operations:

An SLAF MI-17 helicopter was also engaged in distributing dry rations and other needs in the Thoppigala area in Batticaloa that was severely affected by rains. The SLAF was using MI-17 and Bell 212 helicopters to assist the flood victims, he said. The Sri Lanka Army has set up four camps in Wellaveli, Maduru Oya, Dehiaththakandiya and Valaichchenai to assist flood victims while 1500 troops have being deployed to the east to assist the ongoing distribution of dry rations and provide medical assistance, Military spokesman Major General Ubaya Medawala said.

In Wellaveli 1000 persons, in Maduru Oya 25 families, in Dehiaththakandiya 17 families and in Valaichchenai 2000 persons were provided with medical assistance, clothes and dry rations by the army.

Update: The Air Force and Army have stepped up rescue and relief operations. As of 11:00 AM today, the Air Force delivered 2.5 tonnes of dry rations in Batticaloa.

Update at 4:40 PM (via Daily Mirror Mobile Alert): “Three more bodies of landslide victims from Gatambe found bringing total to seven. Bad weather destroyed 132,000 acres of paddy in the East and NCP.”

There has been no confirmation on the exact death toll as yet.

Update at 4:45PM: Seven people have been rescued by the Air Force in Rambakanoya, Ampara (via Ada Derana.) The Daily Mirror has published aerial photographs of terrain affected by the floods and photographs from an air rescue by the Air Force.

The Editors of Groundviews received the following images of the flooding and damages to roads in Batticaloa.

Courtesy of www.facebook.com/battipeople More images can be viewed on that page.

The Disaster Management Centre and the Department of Meteorology issued a rather late ‘early warning’ message last night on their website, which points to the issue of the effectiveness of early warning mechanisms in place and how information concerning public safety can be disseminated to the public immediately in order to minimise possible risks. It is also the responsibility of the Ministry of Disaster Management for Safer Communities and Sustainable Development to issue road travel warnings and to ensure that police departments and other institutions have the capacity to deal with emergencies. After the severe flooding in the Western Province that affected over 70,000 people last year, one would have hoped that the Ministry had set about planning a more effective early warning system and emergency response system. With over 750,000 people affected, it is quite clear that the Ministry needs to focus more on the methods of disaster management and public safety.

• UPDATE: Google Map on Flood-affected areas in Sri Lanka
• Sri Lanka on tsunami alert after Indonesia quake (Updated)
• UPDATE: Situation report on flood-affected areas and a call for assistance
• Google map on flood-affected areas in Sri Lanka – February 2011
• SMS news alerts during emergencies – The experience of JNW and the tsunami warning of 13th September 2007

All elections are important and these will be no exception. It is worth reminding that we are still in a post-war situation and far from the post-conflict one we ought to be in. What this requires is the prioritization of peace, reconciliation and unity and the firm commitment to ensure that the causes of ethnic conflict are not reproduced and sustained.  This means at least the rights of the IDPs as the litmus test for all else, a political settlement of the conflict and a reversal of the culture of impunity in respect of human rights along with facing up to the questions of whether there can be unity without reconciliation and reconciliation without accountability.  This is not all.  There are serious questions to be considered on the economic front with regard to employment and indebtedness – the real consequences of the fate of GSP Plus and the IMF loan – and most importantly in light of recent demonstrations, the ability of the system of education to meet the requirements of the economy.  And given Angulana, what happened to Nipuna Ratnayake and the Bambalapitiya drowning, the overarching issues of the Rule of Law, the supremacy of Constitution and the intentional violation of the Seventeenth Amendment.

Constitutional reform, at least in terms of the abolition or reform of the executive presidency will be on the agenda, as a consequence not so much of the requirements of governance but the emerging imperatives of regime survival and stability.  There is the danger that on this score, what is in store is the abolition of the form and title of the executive presidency with the transfer of its substantive powers to an “executive prime minister”.   The electoral system too, could be up for debate with the virtues of the ‘first-past –the post’ system and constituency MPs being eulogized to discredit proportional representation.

There is a crying need for a national debate on the future of the country and the issues on which the next presidential and general elections are to be fought.  The challenges ahead are far too serious to treat these elections merely as opportunities to register electoral approval, appreciation, admiration and gratitude for the defeat of the LTTE.  There has to be a tomorrow and a time when the war is truly behind us.  We need a plan to move towards that time and in order to design one, as many of us as willing and able must be part of that process.  An agenda for change and reform is critically needed and it will not come from the politicians who are trapped in fighting yesterday’s battles.

The island wide debate, discussion or conversation on change and reform is a vital and integral part of this.  Where however, through or on what medium or channel or site can it be conducted?

The obvious answer is the mainstream print and electronic media.  For a variety of reasons, very real and crucial constraints ranging from official displeasure, threat and sanction to self censorship, ideological disposition, market demands and problems of professionalism, the robust exchange of ideas called for will not happen here and not beyond the efforts of a persistent few, as required.  Moreover, since it is an exchange of ideas – a discussion, debate or conversation- that is called for, many voices need to he heard.  This is not about letters to the editor, about comment and observation alone but about participation and engagement with passion and conviction about the Sri Lanka of the future, we desire and deserve.

Citizens’ journalism and given its record as a forum for quality debate, Groundviews is ideally positioned to make a major contribution to this exercise in national rejuvenation and renaissance.  Is it not possible in the lead up to the elections that citizens use Groundviews to canvass their ideas for constitutional reform, governance, human rights and the economy and whatever else they see as constituting essential elements of an agenda for change and reform? The exchange could, but need not be time bound. As in the nature of a conversation it should be ongoing and active.

This would be a convincing demonstration of the strength and value of citizens’ journalism and its substantial utility in empowerment for peace, governance and human rights – An enabling facility for a functioning democracy.

• Abolition or reform of Executive Presidency in Sri Lanka?
• In conversation with Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu
• In conversation with Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu
• 1,000 posts on Groundviews: Bearing witness, shaping peace
• Strange proposals and broken promises: Constitutional reform in Sri Lanka

It was Velupillai Prabhakaran the late Tamil Tiger leader who once said the Sinhala people have only a short memory. Perhaps it is so and it seems quite in order at this elections, where the war against the Tamil Tigers with Prabhakaran projected as the icon of “terrorism” was turned into a glorifying victorious vote puller.

While the war was being waged with only State witnesses to the battle allowed to get on the dock, the Rajapaksa regime started screwing the opposition with provincial council elections, beginning with the bifurcated Eastern province in 2008 May. The going was good for the Rajapaksas, with the main opposition UNP stuck with a fear psychosis of loosing Sinhala votes, but unable to compete with the ruling UPFA headed by the Rajapaksas to be the owners of the Sinhala psyche. The JVP was also left in a dilemma, the Rajapaksas stealing their shares of the war and leaving them with no clear path to campaign at elections.

The ruling UPFA that began with a 55.3% and 56.4% vote popularity in Sabaragamuwa and NCP respectively when elections were held in August 2008 and the war was being hyped as a winning war, moved to 59.5% and 69.4% in Central and NWP (Wayamba) when elections were held in February 2009, after the military moved into Kilinochchi on January 02^nd and the capture of Paranthan and Elephant pass. The decline of the UNP was evident without any clear idea as to how they should position themselves against the war and the JVP was drained out of their patriotism with 4.9% reduced to a meagre 2.1%.

Rajapaksas kept Uva and Southern Province elections till the last, on the premise that Uva and South would play as their bastion in elections. The early August 2009 Uva PC elections held in less than a month after the war was declared over and the LTTE accepted as decimated, left the main opposition UNP and the JVP flabbergasted. The Rajapaksas, projecting their family image through Sasheendra Rajapaksa as the would be Chief Minister, rode home with a stunning 74.6% and in Moneragala district where young Rajapaksa contested, the popular vote was unbelievably high as 81.3%, reminding one of the old Soviet day elections in Russia.

The UNP reeking with internal squabbles, defeats at every PC elections and with no idea as to how they should face the Rajapaksa steam roller, slumped to a pauperish 21%. Meanwhile the JVP, which avoided “talk the war” and took the Rajapaksas on high handed corruption and an economy that was going haywire, managed to improve, gaining 4.2% this time.

The indications were clear. Within one month and with all the hype of a glorious war victory that was wholly accrued with the Rajapaksa brothers leaving even the Army Commander Fonseka out, the Uva Sinhala majority paid their gratitude as asked for with a resounding 74% and the young Rajapaksa made Chief Minister. Yet with economic hardships snaking out of the ant hill, the JVP got credited with an improved per centage. The UNP that was neither here nor there, could not gain anything from any platform and thus declined further.

The Southern PC election was thus brought in to crown their glory, but 04 months and 20 days after the war was declared won, it wasn’t turning out that easy and that popular. That was too long a period for the Sinhala South to hold on to the memory of a war victory. Human societies perhaps can not live in the past. They have to move on. They would, or they probably would keep a margin for past achievements, if that pays enough for the future. What has the war victory provided for the Sinhala South ?

Despite a massive war victory exhibition held at the BMICH that was given prime time publicity by not only State media channels but by some private channels as well and the whole of the media still made to go hard and bang with glorifying the war victory, the people who live on the ground still has not received any “peace dividend”. Not even the peace in moving about, with the same high security barriers clamped every where.

Worst was, the election campaign in the South brought home for the first time an avalanche of security boulders that wasn’t there even during the war. With high profile ministers and other personalities including some UPFA candidates going round electoral districts, every kerb and corner of villages and towns were plastered with security personnel. Those who came to buy their grocery, the 3wheeler that went for refuelling, the youth who stayed at bus stands going or coming from school or afternoon classes were all treated as “possible” security threats and checked, when the President was on a special campaign trail in Sooriyaweva in Hambantota.

Previously projected Southern PC election scenario against the Results

All election data source – Election department website

I for one, did not take all that as factors that could play negative on the ruling UPFA, especially with all the State resources, power play, media blitzkriegs and the mega cabinet, all taking the South by almost force. Deducting a reasonable percentage for the economic fall, projections showed, the UPFA would not do as well as in Uva, but would still hover close to 70% in the province, starting with 65% in Galle, and improving through Matara with 70% and doing the best in Hambantota with 72% as it is after all the birth place of both the war heroes and the modern day public monarch. That was based on the assumption that Rajapaksa’s performance at his 2005 presidential elections at 63.3%, would improve with the war victory, though not to the extent of the most poor and ignorant district Moneragala.

Voting in the South nevertheless point in a different direction. With all the fire power used in Hambantota, with numerous projects earmarked as “development” of Hambantota, people had not been convinced enough to vote for the UPFA in Hambantota the best, even in the presence of President Rajapaksa, coming at the bottom of the popular list with only 66.9%. Galle did the best again with a 68.3% vote, while Matara came in between with 67.9%. The government could not come any where near their targeted 75 – 80%. The war glamour and its hope of a more promising future as projected by the Rajapaksa regime and its media have not been taken by the people as true or possible under this regime.

The vote gained by the JVP, considered the underdog or the “nonentity” with the war victory totally hijacked by the Rajapaksas, proved their campaign on economic issues, was what the people understood best. They have improved tremendously with 5.5% in Matara and over 11% in Hambantota, where they were bashed and bumped.

The failure of the Rajapaksa regime in delivering any substantial hope for the economic life of the people is evident in how it plays up over their war victory hype at this Southern elections. There is apparently a drop in consumer buying by about 20% which speaks of a reducing buying power in semi urbanised South, than in the peasant Moneragala. But would it remain outside rural life ?

Clearly the war frenzy can not be hyped beyond what it was hyped to. On the war front, the Rajapaksas can not show anything more bigger and more glorious than this defeat of the LTTE and the death of Prabhakaran. Four months and 3 weeks gone and with nothing else seen down the line for a fair living, the government is now being challenged on its economic performance.

The inability of the Rajapaksa regime to even plan on how they would get their money to spend on the estimated expenses, became quite evident before the close of elections, when the government had to announce they would only have a 04 month “vote on account” expenditure plan presented to parliament instead of the usual 2010 budget, without any indication as to how the revenue would be planned and budgeted. What ever the government’s argument is on such escapism and the next parliament that would have to be elected by April this year, the fact remains this government which argues it would continue with more elected power, is unable to put forward its development plan with a budget for 2010.

Can it then survive another few months with high security, threats on opposition voices and media hype on the war victory alone, to win another election? Within an economy that is fast crumbling and the people willing to forget the war to focus on their day to day living, the Rajapaksa strategy seems to be giving way to more opposition.

The brutal campaign against the JVP in Hambantota gave it a new life with 11% votes. Everywhere in this region, extreme repression has given way to more opposition and more stronger voices. It happened during the 30 year war when the LTTE grew with every repressive measure adopted by successive governments that had no answers for the conflict. It is happening in Afghanistan, in the N-E provinces in India and in places like Jammu & Kashmir, Chattisgarh and Lalgarh, in the absence of answers for the conflicts and core issues of their societies.

Here the Rajapaksa regime is also slipping into a similar relapse, after a short, freak popularity. Here the Rajapaksa regime is being rejected by the same people who came on the streets 04 months and 03 weeks ago to crown them as glorious victors. There could be only one other option for this regime now. Go for a quicker elections before it could be too late. One they could still manipulate, when the popularity is a waning 60% plus for now. Unfortunately for them, the fall seems far worse if delayed than Humpty’s fall, with no king’s soldiers any more to put them together.

• The Right NOT to Vote
• Outcome of presidential elections in Sri Lanka: Is there anything to analyse?
• If My Story Could Be Yours Too
• Blinkered vision of Tamil nationalists and socialists is self-defeating
• Surveys with conflicting outcomes

අැමිෙනස්ටිඅායතනෙය් ෙමම කුියා කලාපය පිළිබද ශුි ලංකානු රජය තම විෙරා්ධතාවය පුකාශ කල අතර, ශුි ලංකාෙවි කුිකටි ෙලා්ලින් අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනයට විෙරා්ධතාවය පුකාශ කරමින් පසුගිය 12 ෙවනිදා ෙකාළඹ – ෙකාටුව දුමිරියෙපාළ ඉදිරිපිටදි විෙරා්ධතාවයක්ද දියත් කරන ලදි.
ෙමම විෙරා්ධතාවය ඉදිරිෙය් අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනෙය් සැලසුම අාරමිභවු තැනම ෙලාප් වුනු බව මාෙග් අදහසයි.ෙමම තත්වය හමුෙවි අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනය විසින් පසුගිය 13 ෙවනිදා පුකාශ කර සිටිෙය් “තමන්ෙග් විෙරා්ධතාවය ශුි ලංකානු කුිකටි කණ්ඩායමට විරැද්ධව ෙනාවන බවත් , එම විෙරා්ධතාවය පවත්වනු ලැබුෙවි ශුි ලංකාෙවි බිදවැටි තිෙබන මානව හිමිකමි සුරැකිම සමිබන්ධෙයන් බවයි. එෙමන්ම ශුි ලංකානු රජය තම විෙරා්ධතාවයන් සමිබන්ධෙයන් ශුි ලංකානු වැසියන්ට කරැණු ෙවනස් කර අැති බව ” ඔවුන් සදහන් කල නිෙවිදනෙය් සදහන් ෙකාට තිබිනි.
ෙකෙස් ෙවතත් අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනය කාෙග් ෙහා් අතෙකාලුවක් බවට පත්ව අැති බව මාෙග් මතයයි.ශුි ලංකාෙවි මානව හිමිකමි කඩවිම සමිබන්ධෙයන් විෙරා්ධතාවය පුකාශ කිරිමට ෙලා්ක කුසලාන තරග මාලාව පැවැත්ෙවන බටහිර ඉන්දිය ෙකාෙදවි දුපත් ම ෙමි සදහා ෙතාරා ගනු ලැබුෙවි මන්ද?එයත් ශුි ලංකාව සහභාගි වු තරගයක් පැවැත්ෙවන තරග පිටිය ඉදිරියට වි ඔවුන් රැෙගන ගිය ෙමම විෙරා්ධතාවය සදහා ඔවුන් ජනතාව අතර ප්ලාස්ටික් කුිකටි පන්දු මත අත්සන් ගනු ලැබුෙවි මන්ද?ෙමි අකාරයට ගත් කල අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනෙය් අභිපාුයන් පිළිබද පැහැදිලි කරැණු ෙගානු කර ගැනිම අපහසු ෙනාවන බව මාෙග් මතයයි.ෙමාවුන්ෙග් මුලික අභිපාුය වුෙය් ශුි ලංකානු කණ්ඩායමට විරැද්ධව වෙරා්ධතාවයක් අැති කිරිමත් , එමගින් ශුි ලංකානු කණ්ඩායෙමි මානසිකත්වය බිදවැටිටවිමත්ය.නමුත් අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනය පවසන අාකාරයට ශුි ලංකානු රජය කරැණු ෙවනස් කිරිමක් සිදුෙනාකල අතර, ශුි ලංකානු පුරවැසියන් අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනය සිතනා අකාරයට ශුිු ලංකානු පුරවැසියන් ෙමා්ඩයින්ද ෙනාවන බව අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනයට එ්ත්තු ගැන්විමට අවශය සියලුම කටයුතු කිරිමට ශුි ලංකානු පුරවැසියන් පසුබට ෙනාවු බව නිසා අැමිෙනස්ටි
අායතනෙය් පළමු පියවර පුස්ෙවඩිල්ලක් බවට පත්විය.
පසුගිය 18 ෙවනිදා ශුි ලංකාව – ඔස්ෙටුිලියාව සමග පැවැති තරගය අප කවිරැත් බලාෙපාෙරාත්තු සහගතව බලා සිටියත් අවසන් ෙමාෙහාෙත්දි කණ්ඩායමි කළමණාකාරිත්වය විසින් ගනු ලැබු තිරණයක් මත ශුි ළජකානු පිෙල් පුබලම පන්දු යවන්නන් ෙදෙදනා වන චමින්ද වාස් සහ මුත්තයියා මුරලිදරන් ෙනාවන බව දන්වන ලදි.ෙමම තිරණය පුකාශවිමත් සමග සමස්ත ශුි ලංකානු කුිඩා ෙලාලින්ට පමනක් ෙනාව ෙදස්-විෙදස් මාධයෙවදින්ට පවා ෙමය අදහාගත ෙනාහැකි පුවතක් විය.ලියුමිකරැ වශෙයන් මාහටද ෙමය අදහාගත ෙනාහැකි පුවතක් වු අතර ,ෙමම තිරණය සමිබන්ධෙයන් නිසි ෙහ්තු ෙසායා බැලිමක් කරනවා හැෙරන්නට එ් ගැන වාද විවාද කිරිමට ෙහ්තුවක් ෙනාවන බව මාෙග් මතයයි.
අවසානෙය්දි දැන ගන්නට ලැබුෙන් වාස් සහ මුරලි ෙග් ශාරිරික අබාධයන් නිසා ෙමෙස් විෙවික ගැන්වු බවයි.නමුත්කුිකටි ෙත්රිමි කමිටු සභාපති අසන්ත ද මැල් මහතා එ්.එෆ්.පි.පුවත් අායතනයට පුකාශ කර සිටිෙය් ඔස්ෙටුිලියානුවන්ට මානසික පිඩනයක් එල්ල කිරිම සදහා ෙමම පියවර ගත් බවයි.ඔවුන්ෙග් සැලැස්ම වි තිබුෙන් ෙමම පන්දු යවන්නන්ට මුහුණදි යමි ෙපරහුරැවක් ලබා ගැනිමට වුවත්,ෙමෙලස ගනු ලැබු තිරණය නිසා ඔවුන්ෙග් එම අභිපාුය වැලැක්වි ගිය බවයි.
ෙමම සිද්ධිය සමිබන්ධෙයන් කුිකටි කවුන්සිලය විසින පරික්ෂණයක් පැවැත්විය යුතු බව ඔස්ෙටිුලියානු හිටපු කුිකටි කුිඩක ඉයන් චැපල් විසින් තරගය අවසානෙය්දි ෙදස්-විෙදස් මාධයන් හමුෙවි පුකාශ කර සිටින ලදි.එම පුකාශය අනුමත කරන ලද හිටපු ශුි ලංකානු ෙටස්ටි කුිකටි නායකෙයකු ගැනද වාර්ථා පල විය.අැත්ත වශෙයන්ම ශුි ලංකානු මණ්ඩායෙමි කුිඩකයින් ෙත්රිම සමිබන්ධෙයන් කුිකටි කවුන්සිලයට පුශ්න කිරිමට තබා එ් ගැන පරික්ෂණ පැවැත්විමට නිතිමය ඉඩකඩක් ෙනාමැති අතර,ඉයන් චැපල්ටද ෙමි සදහා අැගිලි ගැසිමට අයිතියක් ෙනාමැත.ඉයන් චැපල්ෙග් ඉල්ලිම පිලිෙගන කුිකටි කවුන්සිලය ෙමි පිළිබද පරික්ෂණයක් අාරමිභ කිරිමට උත්සුක වුවෙහාත් කුිකටි කවුන්සිලයට සැම දිනකම පරික්ෂණ පවත්වනවා හැෙරන්නට ෙවනත් ෙදයක් කිරිමට කාලය ෙනාමැති ෙවනවා ෙනාඅනුමානය.එෙමන්ම ඔස්ෙටුිලියානු
ජාතික කුිඩකයින් වන ෙෂ්න් ෙවාන් සහ මාක් ෙවා් මුදලට තරග ෙතාරතුරැ ලබාදිම ගැන ෙහලිදරවි වු ෙමාෙහාෙත්දි ඔස්ෙටුිලියානු කුිකටි පාලක මණ්ඩලය ගනු ලැබු පියවර කුමක්ද?යන්න ශුි ලංකා කුිකට පාලක මණ්ඩලෙය් මාධය පුකාශක සමන්ත අල්ගම මහතා ඉයන් චැපල් ෙග් පුකාශය සමිබන්ධෙයන් කල කරැණු විමසිමකදි මා හා සදහන් කර සිටින ලදි.
ඔස්ෙටුිලියාව සහ ශුි ලංකාව අතර තරගය පැවැත්ෙවමින් තිෙබන ෙමාෙහාෙත්දි කුිඩා පිටියට කඩා වැදුනු පුද්ගලෙයකු එල්.ටි.ටි.ඊ.ධජයද අත තබා ෙගන පිටිය මැදට දිව අා අතර ,ඔහුව එම ෙමාෙහාෙත්දිම අාරක්ෂක අංශ විසින් අත්අඩංගුවට ගන්නා ලදි.පසුව කල ෙසා්දිසියකදි ඔහු ලග තිබි අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනය විසින් නිකුත් කල සුදු පැහැගත් කුිකටි පන්දුවද විය.
ෙමි අකාරයට ශුි ලංකානු කුිකටි කණ්ඩායමට එෙරහිව ජාතයන්තර වශෙයන් ෙගන යන විෙරා්ධතාවයට ෙහ්තුව කුමක්ද?යන්න පිළිබද ෙසායා බැලිම වටින්ෙන්ය.9 වන ෙලා්ක කුසලාන තරගාවලිෙය් අවසන් වටය සදහා තරග වැෙදන කණ්ඩායමි ෙදක වශෙයන් ඔස්ෙටුිලියාව සහ ශුි ලංකාව ෙලස කුිකටි විස්තර විචාරකයින් දැනටමත් අනාවැකි පලකරන අතර , ඔස්ෙටුිලියානු කණ්ඩායම තමන්ට මුහුණ දිමට සිදුවන ශුි ලංකානු කණ්ඩායම ෙකෙරහි දක්නවන බිය නිසා ෙමවැනි අකාරයට නිවට නියාලු පුහාරයන් එල්ල කිරිමට ඔස්ෙටුිලියානු හිතවාදින කටයුතු කිරිමට පටන් ෙගන අැත.
ෙමවැනි අකාරයට කටයුතු සිදු ෙවමින් පවතින ෙමාෙහාතකදි , ෙමම සියලු කරැණු තුල ගැබිවි අැත්ෙත් ශුි ලංකානු කණිඩායම මානසිකව පිඩාවට පත් කිරිමය.ශුි ලංකිකයන් වශෙයන් ෙමවැනි ෙද් පීළිබදව මාෙග් හැගිම නමි ඉතා පිළිකුල් සහගත බවයි.ශුි ලංකානු කුිකටි පිෙල් සිටලුම ජාතිකයින්ට කුිඩා කිරිමට අවස්ථාව ලබා දි තිබිම සතය වශෙයන්ම උසස් කුියාවක් වන බව මාෙග් මතයයි.1996 වර්ෂෙය්දි ෙලා්ක කුසලානය දිනා ගත් ෙමාෙහාෙත්දි එ් පිළිබදව සතුටු උෙන් සිංහල ජාතිකයින් පමනක් ෙනාෙවි සමස්ත සීංහල.දමිල,මුස්ලිමි ලක් වැසියන් එදා සතුටු වු අාකාරය අදෙමන් මෙග් මතකයට නැෙගන්ෙන් නිරාසෙයනි.අද අප කණ්ඩායෙමි මුරලිදරන්,මහරෑෆ් වැනි කිුඩකයින් කුිඩා කරන්ෙන් සියලු ලක් වැසියන්ෙග් අාශිර්වාදයත් සමගය.මානව හිමිකමි ගැන කතා කරන අැමිෙනස්ටි අායතනය නිෙයා්ජනය කරන රටවල කුිකටි කණ්ඩායමි තුල කලු ජාතික කුිඩකෙයකුට කුිඩා කිරිමට අවස්ථාව උදා උෙන් ෙමි මෑත භාගෙය්දි විම විෙශ්ය. විෙශ්ෂෙයන්ම එංගලන්තය වැනි රටක කුිකටි කණ්ඩායම සදහා කලු ජාතිකෙයක්ට කුිඩා කිරිමට අවස්ථාව උදා වුෙය් 2001 වර්ෂෙය්දිය.දකුණු අපුිකානු කණ්ඩායමටද අැත්ෙත් ෙමවැනි ඉතිහාසයකි.කුිඩාවක් යනු එක් ජාතියකට ,එක් අාගමකට, නියමිත වු ශාරිරික වර්ණයකට හිමිකමි කියනු ලබන ෙදයක් ෙනාවන අතර,කුිඩාවක් යනු මිතු දමත්,සමගිය සහ සාමය අැති කරනු ලබන කුියාවලිෙයකි.නමුත් ෙමවැනි උසස් කුියාවක් ෙවනුෙවන් වර්ථමානෙය්දි කුියා කරනු ලබන අාකාරය පතා පහත් නින්දාවක් බව මාෙග් මතයයි.ඉතා ඉක්මනින් ෙමවැනි කටයුතු වලින් අෑත්වනවානමි එය කුිඩාවට කරනු ලබන ගරැකිරිමක්බව මාෙග් මතයයි.
කුිඩාවක නියම අර්ථය ෙනාදන්නා ෙමවන් සුලු පිරිසක් ඉදිරිෙය් තමන්ෙග් නියම දක්ෂතාවයන් ෙපන්වා , ෙමවර ෙලා්ක කුසලානය දිනා ගනිමින් එ් සදහා අවශය පිළිතුරැ පුතිවාදින්ට ලබා දිමට ශුි ලංකානු කුිකටි කණ්ඩායමට අවශය ශක්තිය ෙෙධර්ය ලැෙබිවා ! යන්න අප ඉත සිතින් පාුර්ථනා කරන්ෙනමු.

• නැගනහිර යූද්ධය තූල තනීවූ සාමෙය් නගරය.
• யார் தான் நல்லவர்கள்?
• යාපනෙය්දි මිනිසත් බව දුටිමි

In the wake of numerous interpretations and reinterpretation of the present political situation as a result of the recent crossover by the political elites, the authors of this article attempt to discuss how citizens perceive the crossover. The results of the latest poll, that was conducted by Social Indicator – Centre for Policy Alternatives are used to discuss the public views in this article. This survey was conducted amongst 1300 individuals residing in 17 districts using the interview technique. It should be noted that this survey was conducted Islandwide with the exception of the North & East and therefore does not capture the opinion of the Sri Lankan Tamil community.

Who’s hurt the most: UNPers or JVPers
Despite the justifying rationales put forward by the MPs who have crossed over, the present political accusations and counter accusations indicate that the crossover has hurt many parties who lost their MPs as well as who lost their political positions. If we were to look at the UNP itself, it lost a group of heavy weights including its deputy leader as a result of the recent crossover. Also it led the opposition leader Mr. Wickramasinghe to a new battle in order to retain the opposition leadership from the JVP; a party that has shown a remarkable capacity in mobilizing the masses against any ruling party. The present government too, is faced with issues resulting from the crossover. President Rajapakse’s main electoral ally, the JVP, permanently walked into the opposition while vowing to topple the Government, accusing the government of going against the electoral mandate, it received in November 2005. Not only that, but this parliamentarian exodus triggered a battle between the president and the two ministers, Mr. Mangala Samaraweera and Mr. Sripathi Suriarachchi, who have done tremendous work in bringing President Mahinda Rajapakse into office. On one hand the crossovers shook the status quo of the government while on the other hand it annulled the memorandum of understanding signed between the SLFP and the UNP even before its ink dried up. In addition, this disappointed the groups who were optimistic and overjoyed about the rare opportunity of a southern consensus.

The disapproval of the crossover is highest amongst the JVP loyalists – 68% disapprove while 15% approve of it. Perhaps this could be a reflection of the feeling of humiliation that they are undergoing after the SLFP sidelined them ignoring the crucial role they performed at the elections. Amongst the UNPers, only 48% disapprove of its own party members crossing to the SLFP while 34% of them could not decide whether to approve or disapprove of it. However, 18% of the UNPers approve the crossover. While on one hand this reflects the frustration of the UNPers with their leadership on the party reforms, on the other hand this is a clear indication of the confused status of the UNPers in the aftermath of losing a group of the most senior members of the party. Interestingly, this survey does not indicate that the SLFPers are over-jubilant about the newly captured elephant herd. This is apparent as only 50% of them approve of the crossover while 30% disapprove.

Crossover for Democracy or Vise Versa:
In the present electoral system, more primacy has been given to the parties than to the MPs. When selecting candidates for an election, most members are at the mercy of the party leaders. Even after being elected to the parliament, MPs will have to support the party decision rather than acting on their conscience. In this context, MPs do not have much option other than crossing over to another party that allows them to voice the concerns of their communities or adhere to one’s conscience. Therefore, MPs crossing over to another party can be considered as an expression of democracy that one may want to practice. This was not the first time where MPs crossed over to another party in the parliament and neither, we suppose, the last time. However, when analyzing the history of crossing over, usually it has been the opposition MPs who crossover to the ruling party instead of otherwise. Some get cabinet portfolios with other privileges while others allegedly receive huge sums of money. Therefore, it is very difficult to decide whether it is principle or perks that matter when deciding to crossover.

It is interesting see on what grounds people have approved or disapproved of the recent MP drain from the opposition to the ruling party. Amongst the people who approve of the recent crossover, 50% think that the move strengthens the Government and the President while 24% think that it would help the Government’s present war with the LTTE. Only 6% approve of the crossover on the basis that it is an expression of democracy. Interestingly, more SLFP loyalists than UNP loyalists approve of the recent crossover as it strengthens the Government and the president. Nevertheless, even for UNPers who support the crossover, the main reason for their approval is that it strengthens the Government and the president.

Amongst the people who disapprove of the recent crossover, 46% disapprove on the basis that it adds a bigger burden to the public due to the the increased number of ministerial posts. However, 9% disapprove on the basis that it damages democracy while 7% and 6% reject the crossover as it goes against the ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’ and as it will lead to the abrogation of the SLFP- UNP MOU, respectively. It is interesting to see the varying reasons on which different party loyalists disapprove of the recent crossover. The primary reason for the SLFP and UNP loyalists to disapprove of the crossover is the fact that this will become a bigger burden for the already suffering Sri Lankans. However, JVP loyalists who disapprove of the crossover seem to have two main arguments. They think this is a clear violation of the ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’ that they successfully advocated during the presidential elections and that the large number of present ministerial posts would (will?) increase the burden on the citizens. 29% of JVPers see the recent crossover as against the ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’, while only 9% of SLFPers think that way.

Hence, when looking at the rationales for approvals and disapprovals, it seems that it is based on three arguments, namely forming a national government, waste of public funds and betraying the mandate received for the ‘Mahinda Chinthanaya’. According to Mr. Karu Jayasuriya, his motive of crossing over was the dire need to join the two main parties in the South, in order to solve the ethnic conflict and establish good governance. When analyzing the (often vague) interviews of President Rajapakse in the wake of the crossover, it seems that both the President and Mr. Jayasuriya are trying to voice that they have the same objectives. If it is the case we do not think anyone would disagree with such a noble objective. Nevertheless, unfortunately what we see in the government today does not reflect the stated objectives.

If the recent cross over means to assist the Government in solving the protracted ethnic conflict, then the Government must be keen on a negotiated settlement on the basis of a federal structure, because, the heavy weights of the reformists who crossed over were the individuals who led the UNP Government’s peace process that insisted on a solution within a federal united Sri Lanka. However, having had their cabinet portfolios, they have not yet shown any active engagement in such activities. Therefore, Minister Thissa Vitharana has to be engaged in a solo battle at the APRC, in bringing forward a constitutional transformation. Given the SLFP’s negative stand on the CFA and the passive commitment to constitutional arrangement, it is not clear what the role of UNP reformist is in transforming SLFPers to perceive for the federal solution that has been agreed in the Oslo Communique in 2003.

Given the wastage of public funds in maintaining the large number of ministries, which was the primary result of the crossover and the prevailing impunity that has high potential to worsen in months to come, do not show a rosy picture on good governance that Mr. Rajapakse and Mr. Jayasuriya are dreaming about. Therefore, the rationales given as the basis for the crossover are difficult for people to stomach.

However, it is undeniable that this recent crossover has made President Rajapakse stronger – a personage whose popularity is anyway on the boom in the context of the recent military victory in the East. Therefore, we believe President Rajapakse enjoys a stronger political position, empowering him to make drastic political decisions in order to solve the country’s ethnic conflict even if he is unable to clean the office of corrupt officials and politicians.

Therefore, in next few months public can witness the real impact of the cross over on the Sri Lankan society and how distance the reality from the claimed motives of the UNP reformists.

Authors:
Pradeep Peiris and Rangani Ranasinghe are researchers of the Social Indicator, the survey research unit of the Centre for Policy Alternatives.

• Crossing over into chaos
• The General and his necessary evils
• Political solution or political illusion?
• Federalism: Some debates never die
• Public Perceptions: National Security and/or Human Rights