Photo courtesy of Bloomberg
In the first electoral test for President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and his National People’s Power party since they won the presidential and parliamentary elections in 2024, more than 17 million people will go to the polls to elect their local government representatives on May 6. One hundred and seven registered political parties and 49 independent groups have submitted their nominations. Some 8,500 representatives will be elected to 340 councils.
The last elections to elect local government councils for a four year term were held in 2018. New elections were due in 2022 but postponed because of a lack of funds due to the economic crisis. In the interim local government institutions functioned without an elected leadership. Due to the failure to hold the elections, the administration of 336 local government institutions is currently under special commissioners instead of elected representatives.
The Election Commission has received a total of 2,298 complaints filed at the National Centre for Election Complaints and the District Centre for Election Complaints since March 20 in regards to the elections. In the most serious incident of violence, SLPP candidate Dan Priyasad, was shot dead in his Wellampitiya home by two armed men. In Katana, another candidate shot and killed a man who was trying to stab him.
The elections will be the second time that the 25 percent women’s quota is being implemented and the first time that a 25 percent youth quota will be implemented. The Election Commission has reported that complications in fulfilling the requirements to meet the stipulated percentages of female and youth representation have led several nomination lists being rejected. Contradictory rulings by the Supreme Court and the Appeals Court over what constitutes a legitimate copy also caused further rejections.
Groundviews spoke to CMEV’s Chief Operations Officer, Professor Arjuna Parakrama, about the rising election violence, the spread of misinformation and conflicting court rulings.
What types of election violations have you seen so far and are they more than in the two recent elections?
It’s a very important question. It strikes at the heart of the difference between this election and the two that we had last year. For the last few years, we’ve had elections that were relatively better in terms of overt violence. We did not have murders, petrol bombs and things like that, all of which we are seeing during this election. The texture of the violations have got more serious. We have also seen different kinds of violations. On social media there is disinformation and misinformation with calculated targeting of campaigns and individuals. We are also harking back to the older times when some candidates feared for their lives. We had two incidents of murder although the jury’s out on if it is actually about the election or something else. But certainly they’re candidates so it has to be about the election. Otherwise why now, why in this context? We are seeing an escalating trend. People have got together and are campaigning in earnest so we’re seeing an escalation of violence and confusion that we didn’t see last time. The confusion is related to the decisions by the court and the decisions of the Election Commission, which is fairly rigid and dogmatic, sticking to the letter and not the spirit of the law.
What is the contradiction between the Supreme Court ruling versus the Appeals Court?
There were a number of nomination papers that were rejected at the district level by the district secretaries who are the chief returning officers. Some of them were rejected on the basis of substance. That is, if they didn’t have the percentage of women candidates and so on, and that’s fine. But there were some were rejected on the basis of technicalities. The most ubiquitous was when a birth certificate or some other certificate was not a certified copy in terms of the letter of the law. Many applications were rejected because they were certified by a justice of the peace or a notary. Many people went to the Supreme Court, which upheld that because it’s a certified copy as opposed to a true copy it is not valid. This is semantics because a true copy can be certified by these notaries. A certified copy has to be certified by the original designating authority. So if it’s a birth certificate, it’s the people who issue the birth certificates, which is the Department of Registration of Persons or the Birth and Death Registry. Therefore many were rejected. That was upheld. But some people went to the Court of Appeal on this same grounds and the Court of Appeal held that it can be certified by a recognised notary and somebody who is authorised to certify. It is a complete contradiction. As a result many who went to the Court of Appeal are now reinstated and their nomination papers have been taken in. Some who went to the Supreme Court were rejected and their nominations have not been taken in. The bottom line is you have two decisions, one contradictory to the other. So now we are implementing both. Some nomination papers have been rejected on the basis of the Supreme Court decision and some have been accepted on that same thing on the basis of the Court of Appeal. The question we are asking the Election Commission is which of these holds for the next election or even for those who have been penalised under this because it’s not equal.
What is being done to tackle the spread of misinformation through social media?
We have taken a tough stand about what the president has been saying at his rallies, which we see as a violation of the basic law because he’s saying that if you want money allocated through the local government authorities, you need to have an NPP controlled local government authority. We have identified eight places where he said that. It is on his official social media accounts. So that’s the vehicle and the impact is much greater than only to those who were at the meeting. We have raised the matter and I got the letter from the Election Commission saying that it had sent a letter to the president informing him that statements of this nature could cause prejudice to other parties, groups and candidates contesting in the election. This was also contested. When a newspaper carried an article about the complaint, the Director General of Information wrote to it saying it was fake news and to remove it immediately because no such letter had gone. This went back and forth and now it seems the letter had been sent on the day that the Director General of Information said that no such letter had gone. It raises the question of why the Director General of Information should intervene in an issue that relates to the president in his capacity as a campaigner for a particular party. The Department of Information is a state body. We heard from the Election Commission that Meta and other social media platforms are not willing to play ball in relation to local government elections, so the Commission is not going to get that support.
What are the chances of violence on election day and afterwards?
I’m sorry to say this but I think the signs are not good. The Dan Priyasad thing does not seem to be a spur of the moment; since he is a candidate I think there is a connection. We are now living in a very violent society, a polarised society where issues are resolved with a gun, with bombs and with threats and that is bound to percolate if it’s unchecked.