Opinion

Is ‘Democracy’ at Death’s Door?

Published

4 years ago

2021/08/24

Sahan Weerasooriya

A recent teachers’ protest

By PALITHA SENANAYAKE

Whenever the government in a democratic country like Sri Lanka opts to assert control over a socially fluid situation, the opposition groups tend to question such efforts posing the question, ‘Is this democracy?’ The manner in which this question is posed infers that the government of the day, by its effort to assert itself, is attempting to impinge on the rights of a democratic society, where freedom to express and to demonstrate are upheld as ‘sacrosanct’. This, however, is not only a misconception but also a subliminal notion that opposition groups, in their politically expedient endeavours, try to inculcate in the minds of the people; much against the spirit of what a democratic society should really be.

The irony about democracy today, in relation to many developing countries, appears to be that everybody knows what democracy is and how good a system of governance it is, but nobody seems to know how to deploy it to pull their countries out of the woods.

The concept of democracy and constitution, as a form of government originated in ancient Athens, circa 508 BC. In ancient Greece, there were many city-states with different forms of government, and many intellectuals and philosophers as well, who evaluated the best form of governance for a state. They coined ‘democracy’ from the Latin lexicon to mean the ‘Government of the people’. It was in contrast, and was also an evolved form of the past forms of governance; monarchy- of one person, and aristocracy- of the elites, and to democracy- of all the people. The thinking at the time was that, the broader the base of governance, the more representative it would be of the peoples’ needs and aspirations. Yet, since the question of responsibility taking, and execution of power, was central to any form of governance, they realised that the broader the base, the weaker would be the execution of power and the responsibility for actions.

The problem of exercising power was overcome by electing a representatives’ Government for a particular period, entrusting them with the power to enact laws and to execute peoples’ power. Then, the last but not the least issue of responsibility, meaning the responsibility for the laws enacted and for the power executed. The fact that a government is appointed from time to time, does not exonerate the responsibility for the laws enacted and for the execution of power, from the true owners of the state; the people, as sovereignty lies with them and hence also the responsibility. Thus, it behoves that, if the king is held responsible in a monarchy, and the Council of noblemen in an aristocracy, it is the people themselves that are responsible for the actions and governance and also for the conduct of the democracy. A citizenry that is not responsible enough in his/ her conduct to ensure a democratic society, does not deserve to enjoy the democratic system, and hence will degenerate back to either a junta type governance or dictatorship; the current version of the monarchy.

Accordingly, if an elected government is not keeping up to its election manifesto, not transparent in its activity; financial and otherwise, the people have the right to demand that it carry out its election undertakings and exercise transparency in all its affairs. In this respect, it is more the duty of those who voted for the prevailing government that should question these aspects of democratic governance; because failure on the part of the current government on those, could lead to a debacle at the next election.

Having established the rights and responsibilities of those who voted for the Government elect, it is necessary to consider the responsibilities of those who voted against as well, because there is no democratic system of governance anywhere that enables all its citizens to win at an election. In this, that section of the people who voted against, have to assimilate into the mainstream whether they like it or not. Just as the government that is elected pledges to run the country for all its citizens, those who voted against too have a responsibility to abide by the rules of the new government. The emphasis this point deserves could be bestowed by stating that ‘just as a government that is not equitable and accommodative of all its citizens have no right to govern the country, those countrymen who are not prepared to concede the majority’s right to elect and govern will also have no right to enjoy or to be protected by, the democratic system’.

That invariably, has to be the stand to take, because the alternative is simply, anarchy.

In that light, how could we view the recent demonstrations conducted by the JVP and other trade union affiliated organisations in this midst? Their main point of contention was that the ‘pandemic curfew’ should not be used to suppress the democratic rights of the masses. Considering the fact that the JVP and certain other unions always had some demonstration or the other, there never could be a time for a pandemic lockdown, as it was a never-ending series of demonstrations since the current government assumed power. Another argument is that the government is using the pandemic to pass legislation that is unpopular and socially inimical.

Well, since the current government was elected with an extraordinary popular mandate, how could these trade unions and the JVP appoint themselves as the arbiters of the popularity or the socially inimical nature of a particular legislation? This makes the current demonstration scenario an attempt to sabotage the democratic right of the current government that was elected by the majority, thereby undermining the right of the majority in this country. This is simply because the trade unions and the JVP are organized, whereas the mass of people who voted are rather unorganized, and hence being reduced to the position of mere spectators. In any case, it is not a socially responsible act for the Government supporters to stage demonstrations in support of the Government at the current times.

Therefore, it should now be clear that the current conduct of the JVP and the trade unions is in breach of the core principle of democracy, and also it is the JVP and the trade unions that are taking advantage of the pandemic to stage their irresponsible demonstrations, reducing the responsible majority to be mere spectators. Sooner the people and the Government realize this, amidst all that rhetoric, coupled with prompting action, the Sri Lankan society would bring the most socially inimical action perpetrated on it in recent times, to an end.

All News Advertisement

Opinion

LG polls, what a waste of money!

Published

32 mins ago

2025/03/13

Sahan Weerasooriya

If the people of this country were asked whether they want elections to the local government, majority of them would say no! How many years have elapsed since the local councils became defunct? And did not the country function without these councils that were labelled as ‘white elephants’?

If the present government’s wish is to do the will of the people, they should reconsider having local government elections. This way the government will not only save a considerable amount of money on holding elections, but also save even a greater amount by not having to maintain these local councils, which have become a bane on the country’s economy.

One would hope that the country will be able to get rid of these local councils and revert back to the days of having competent Government Agents and a team of dedicated government officials been tasked with the responsibility of attending to the needs of the people in those areas.

M. Joseph A. Nihal Perera

Opinion

What not to do

Published

1 day ago

2025/03/12

Sahan Weerasooriya

Trump and Zelensky arguing in the White House

By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

It is immaterial whether you like him or not but one thing is crystal clear; Donald Trump has shown, very clearly, who is the boss. Surely, presidents of two countries are equal; perhaps, that is the impression Volodymyr Zelensky had when he went to the White House to meet Trump but the hard reality, otherwise, would have dawned on him with his inglorious exit! True, the behaviour of President Trump and VP Vance were hardly praiseworthy but Zelensky did what exactly he should not do. Afterall, he was on a begging mission and beggars cannot be choosers! He behaved like professional beggars in Colombo who throw money back when you give a small amount!!

Despite the risk of belonging to the minority, perhaps of non-Americans, I must say that I quite like Trump and admire him as a straight-talking politician. He keeps to his words; however atrocious they sound! Unfortunately, most critics overlook the fact that what Trump is doing is exactly what he pledged during his election campaign and that the American voters elected him decisively. When he lost to Biden, all political commentators wrote him off, more so because of his refusal to admit defeat and non-condemnation of his supporters who rioted. When he announced his intention to contest, it only evoked pundits’ laughter as they concluded that the Republican Party would never nominate him. Undaunted, Trump got the party to rally round him and won a non-consecutive second term; a feat achieved only once before, by Grover Cleveland around the end of the nineteenth century. His victory, against all predictions, was more decisive as he got more collegiate votes and, even though it does not matter, won the popular vote too which he did not get when he got elected the first term. Even his bitterest critics should accept this fact.

Zelensky was elected the president of Ukraine after the elected pro-Soviet president was deposed by a ‘peoples revolution’ engineered by the EU with the support of USA. After this, the EU attempted to bring Ukraine to NATO, disregarding the Munich agreement which precipitated the Russian invasion. He should have realised that, if not for the air-defence system which Trump authorised for Ukraine during his first term, Russian invasion would have been complete. It may well be that he was not aware as when this happened Zelensky may still have been the comedian acting the part of the president! Very likely, Trump was referring to this when he accused Zelensky of being ungrateful.

Zelensky also should have remembered that he disregarded requests from Trump, after his defeat by Biden, to implicate Biden’s son in some shady deals in Ukraine and that one of the last acts of Biden was to pardon his son and grant immunity to cover the alleged period. Perhaps, actions of the European leaders who embrace him every time they see him, as a long-lost brother, and invitations to address their parliaments has induced an element of the superiority complex in Zelensky that he behaved so combative.

Trump wanted to be the mediator to stop the war and spoke to Putin first. Instead of waiting for Trump to speak to him, egged on by EU leaders Zelensky started criticising Trump for not involving him in the talks. His remark “He should be on our side” demonstrated clearly that Zelensky had not understood the role of a mediator. His lack of political experience was the major reason for the fiasco in the White House and the subsequent actions of Trump clearly showed Zelensky where he stands! PM Starmer and President Macron seem to have given some sensible advice and he seems to be eating humble pie. In the process Trump has ensured that the European nations pay for their defence than piggy-backing on the US, which I am sure would please the American voter. By the way, though Macron talks big about defence France spends less than 2% of GDP. Trump seems vindicated. Of course, Trump could be blamed for being undiplomatic but he can afford to be as he has the upper hand!

Ranil on Al Jazeera

Zelensky has shown what not to do: instead of being diplomatic being aggressive when you need favours! Meanwhile, Ranil has shown what not to do when it comes to TV interviews. God only knows who advised him, and why, for him to go ‘Head to Head’ with Mehdi Hasan on Al-Jazeera. Perhaps, he wanted to broadcast to the world that he was the saviour of Sri Lanka! The experienced politician he is, one would have expected Ranil to realise that he would be questioned about his role in making Sri Lanka bankrupt as well, in addition to raising other issues.

The interview itself was far from head to head; more likely heads to head! It turned out to be an inquisition by Tiger supporters and the only person who spoke sense being Niraj Deva, who demonstrated his maturity by being involved in British and EU politics. The worst was the compere who seems keen to listen his own voice, reminding me of a Sinhala interviewer on a YouTube channel whose interviews I have stopped watching!

Ranil claims, after the interview was broadcast, that it had been heavily edited reduced from a two-hour recording. Surely, despite whatever reason he agreed to, he should have laid ground rules. He could have insisted on unedited broadcast or his approval before broadcast, if it was edited. It was very naïve of Ranil to have walked in to a trap for no gain. Though his performance was not as bad as widely reported, he should have been more composed at the beginning as he turned out to be later. Overall, he gave another opportunity for the Tiger rump and its supporters to bash Sri Lanka, unfortunately.

Medhi Hasan should watch some of David Frost interviews, especially the one with Richard Nixon, and learn how to elicit crucial information in a gentle exploratory manner than shouting with repeated interruptions. He does not seem to think it is necessary to give time for the interviewee to respond to his questions. I will never watch Al-Jazeera’s “Head to Head” again!

Ranil’s best was his parting shot; when asked by Hasan whether he would contest the next presidential election, he said “No, I will retire and watch Al-Jazeera and hope to see you better mannered”!

Opinion

Ajahn Brahm to visit SL in May 2025

Published

2 days ago

2025/03/11

Sahan Weerasooriya

The Ajahn Brahm Society of Sri Lanka (ABSSL) is pleased to announce that Ajahn Brahm will be visiting Sri Lanka for a short stay in May this year. Many, both Buddhists and non-Buddhists, know him and have listened to his addresses made on earlier visits, including his 2023 public talk at the BMICH, which was attended by over 4,000 people.

Ajahn Brahmavamso, popularly known as Ajahn Brahm, is the Head Abbot of Bodhinyana Monastery in Serpentine, Perth. He was a pupil of the famous Thai forest monk Ajahn Chah, considered the best Theravada meditation teacher in the last century. By his own choice, Ajahn Brahmavamso shortened his name and was extra pleased that the initials represent the major religions of the world. He is renowned world-wide as an outstanding meditation bhikkhu, teacher and instructor, guiding thousands of practitioners.

As in previous visits, Ajahn Brahm’s schedule will be packed with addresses, meetings with senior professionals, business leaders, and researchers. This year, a special session has been included for teenagers and young adults.

The agenda planned for him includes:

Public address at the BMICH to all irrespective of religion and age; then to a younger audience.

· Exclusive Leadership Forum for senior professionals and business leaders.

· Forum with academics engaged in research at the Centre for Meditation Research, University of Colombo.

· A week-long meditation retreat for the Ven Sangha and experienced lay meditators.

Public Addresses

The public addresses will be on Sunday, May 18, 2025, from 7:00 am to 11:00 am, at the BMICH Main Hall and Sirimavo Halls; Ajahn Brahm moving from one hall to another so the entire audience sees him. Each hall will be well equipped with audio and video presentation. The first address: The Art of Meaningful Living, is designed for all, age notwithstanding, offering wisdom and practical insights for a fulfilling life. The second: Coping with Life Transitions and Emotional Challenges, is a special session tailored for teens and young adults, addressing key challenges faced by them in today’s fast-paced, competitive world. Both talks will be in English, with concise translation to Sinhala by Ven Damita Thera.

Exclusive Forums

On Saturday, May 17, 2025, two exclusive forums will be held at the BMICH Committee Room, Jasmine Hall. The first such session will be with eighty invited Sri Lankan academics and scientists engaged in research on meditation at the Centre for Meditation Research of the University of Colombo. This will be followed in the evening by an interactive session for a hundred invited senior professionals and business leaders, featuring a talk on leadership followed by a Q&A session.

Meditation Retreat

The most significant item on Ajahn Brahm’s programme will be a week-long meditation retreat at the Barberyn Waves Ayurveda Resort in Weligama. Focus is intended to be on the fifty members of the Ven Sangha. A limited number of experienced lay meditators will also have the opportunity to participate.

Participation & Registration

Those interested in attending the public talks at the BMICH are kindly advised to register at to secure free passes. For further information, please contact the Ajahn Brahm Society of Sri Lanka at .