The second burning of an opposition politician’s house took place within the last 48 hours (Sunday evening). However, the incident is being treated trivially by the government as well as society. A society so accustomed to lawlessness is treating this as just another incident. It seems to be of no more importance than a mosquito bite.
When in several articles, the Sri Lankan situation was compared to worst situations of abysmal lawlessness some were of the view that the situation within Sri Lanka was not that bad. In fact, the comparisons with situations such as the ones described in the Gulag Archipelago, 1918- 1956 by Solzhenitsyn were treated by some as exaggerations. There were even claims that such comparisons are inaccurate equations that are not justified, even remotely.
A member of parliament or even a candidate for parliament selected by a political party has a status to be recognised within a democracy. The whole system of the legislature will be run by persons who are elected from such candidates. The system recognises the importance of the legislature when giving protection to all those who are recognised by political parties as their candidates for such positions. It is the legislature that is being treated with so little respect when persons of this category can be subjected to lawlessness of the worse type with impunity.
What party such a person belongs to, or even what kind of a person the particular individual may be is irrelevant. In such matters it is not the United National Party or persons like John Pulle and Ranga Bandara that are being attacked. It is the very system of governance by people’s representatives which is what parliamentary democracy is all about, that is under attack. Thus the gravity of the problem is that it is as worse as it can be.
Responsibilities of some of the highest officers and institutions have been violated relating to a very serious matter. The trust placed on people who hold public office and institutions that are being given the task of protecting the parliamentary system has been violated. However, the whole issue is treated cynically and disregarded as a matter of no importance.
An attack on the parliamentary process should be treated as the worst act of terrorism. However, the country’s laws have not developed to treat such acts against the very system of the parliament as a matter of significance. For writing an article to a newspaper which is said to be provocative a person may be sentenced to 20 years of imprisonment. But attacking the electoral process through a candidate or a member of parliament will at best be treated merely as an arson attack.
Even that depends on the investigators. Judging by the inquiry into the incidents relating to John Pulle there is nothing much to be expected in that area.
The issue however, is about the way the spokesmen for society, be they spokesmen for the government, opposition parties, academics and intellectuals and others in civil society organizations view this issue. When they are forced to defend the parliamentary process will they express their indignation for what has happened? Will they ensure that the legal process will function as it should?
When the systems have collapsed and abysmal lawlessness becomes the way of life in society none of these things will happen. Will those who deny that Sri Lanka is a gulag island demonstrate by their interventions that Sri Lanka still has a functioning system of law? Or will they by their own behavior, conditioned by the fear psychosis, demonstrate the mentalities that can be present only within a gulag while pretending that they are living within a rule of law system and a democracy.