(Continued from last week)

Given subsequent developments and the progressive estrangements that have taken place over a period of time, in retrospect, one feels there was a serious insufficiency in the kind and quality of the visits to Jaffna and the North, by those from the South of the country, particularly from the Governmental entities in the South. Even for us in the Ministry of Food and Co-operatives, this proved to be the only organized visit during a fairly lengthy period of time. The post 1983 situation made interaction more difficult.

The sorry situation we now find ourselves in is due to a failure of policy, or perhaps more accurately due to the lack of a policy by successive governments. The divisiveness and the greed for power involved in Sri Lanka’s politics, both North and South, were not fallow ground for the commitment, the stamina, the patience and the objectivity required for the formulation of sound policy. The focus was on the next election whether Local, General, later Provincial, Presidential, or even Co-operative, and how to achieve power at these, progressively, at any cost. It is extremely difficult, if not almost impossible to breed sound policy from such sterile soil. It was not due to nothing that an intelligent and discerning Asian statesman chose some years ago to describe or categorize a Sri Lankan election as “An auction to distribute non-existent resources.

The High Posts Committee of Parliament

The UNP government of 1977, introduced a select committee process in Parliament to decide whether those officials chosen to “high posts,” were deserving to hold them. This committee of senior Members of Parliament, both from the government side and from those of opposition parties, represented in Par, lament and chaired by the Prime Minister interviewed basically three categories of officials. These were Secretaries to Ministries; Chairmen of Corporations; and Ambassadors and High Commissioners’ designate.

The procedure followed by the committee set up under standing orders was for it to publish a notice in all the main newspapers Sinhala, Tamil and English listing the names and designations of the officials due to come before the committee, and inviting the public to make any representations in writing to the committee, if they so desired. Concurrently, the committee sent out a comprehensive form, in which the officers concerned had to declare their assets and liabilities. After these preliminaries were over, a date was given for you to appear before the committee. The dress prescribed was formal attire, which for men were a lounge suit or national dress, and for women saree, or exceptionally any other form of formal attire.

My first experience of this committee was when I was summoned in my capacity as Secretary to the Ministry of Food and Co-operatives. Thereafter, I have appeared before the committee at different times and under different governments when holding different posts such as Secretary to the Ministry of Public Administration, Provincial Councils and Home Affairs and Secretary to the Ministry of Education and Higher Education. Altogether, I would have made about four appearances.

On all those occasions, the committee did not deem it necessary to question me. They all looked somewhat embarrassed and apologetic when I appeared, and on the last occasion when I appeared before them as Secretary to the Ministry of Education and Higher Education, a senior member of Parliament Mr. A.C.S. Hameed having looked around, apologized for calling me, explained that this was because the formality had to be gone through, said they all realized how busy I was and ended by saying, “We won’t detain you any further. Please go back to your important work.

” The only other observation made on this occasion came from Mr. Paul Perera, Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee who was present and who, as I stood up to leave, looked at my dress and approvingly said “Nice coat.” In fact, on this occasion I came out so quickly, that some of the Ambassadors designate and others waiting to be called looked at me in astonishment. Someone asked, “what happened? Sacked?” “Dismissed from their presence, not from the job,” I replied. What did they say they wanted to know.

“Sentenced to more hard labour” I replied. This committee treated most senior public servants with courtesy and consideration. They knew their track records. At their level of seniority and experience, they knew the genuine from the counterfeit.

Acting Secretary, Ministry of Public Administration and Home Affairs

In July 1979, 1 was appointed to act as Secretary to the Ministry of Public Administration and Home Affairs, in addition to my duties, for an extended period of 29 days. Tile Secretary, Mr. DBI Siriwardhana and the Minister Mr. Montague Jayawickrema. both left for a number of conferences, meetings and a study tour. During this acting period, I tried to spend half day in each Ministry, generally choosing the afternoon to be in the Food Ministry.

The reason for this was, that I could go on into the evening and clear up the day’s work of my own Ministry. In the meantime, if any matter of urgency arose in the other Ministry, during the afternoon I could get down the papers or the relevant officials to Union Place. During this acting period. one of those matters which involved a great deal of attention and detailed work was the creation of the new District of Kilinochchi, about which I had to have more than one discussion with the Attorney-General and be present in the Public Officers’ box in Parliament when the issue came up for debate before it. The next issue which took up considerable time were the arrangements for the departure abroad of the Prime Minister, Mr. Premadasa.

I got involved in this in my capacity as Acting Secretary, Home Affairs. The Prime Minister, who was a methodical and meticulous person, wished to have his departure arrangements made with care, certainty and an eye for detail. I had therefore, to chair several meetings at the behest of the Prime meeting office and his personal staff. All this was done and according to requirements I was myself at the airport in the early hours of the night.

The plane was drawn up, quite close to the old VIP lounge, so that the Prime Minister could walk up to it through the door leading from the lounge to the tarmac. There were as usual a number of personal and political supporters who had come to see him off. Nobody was supposed to go outside through the door except the Prime Minister, and those travelling with him and the protocol officers. When the time for departure came, the Prime Minister and the relevant persons moved out.

But there was no stopping a number of his supporters, who also forcibly went through the doorway. I myself didn’t intend to go out, but stay in the lounge until the plane departed, as protocol demanded. But since this throng of people forced their way outside, I too thought of stepping out and seeing what was happening. As I looked around, I saw a sight that quite startled me. There, in the crowd was a stocky, well-set coarse looking man, who was nonchalantly lighting a cigarette! We were outside, on the tarmac. The Prime Minister had boarded the plane, which was only a. short distance away. The air was pungent with the smell of jet fuel.

In the midst of all this, a lunatic was trying to blow up the airport! I desperately looked around and saw an armed guard, a short distance away on the other side. I quickly went up to him and reported that there was a man smoking, and asked him to deal with him immediately. His reply stunned me more than the sight of the man lighting the cigarette. He told me that he was sorry but that he could not leave his position! According to the logic of his interpretation of his duties, the airport could blow up along with him so long as he was at his post at the time! What I could clearly see from his tone and manner was that he did not wish to get involved in some possible argument with some influential supporter of the Prime Minister.

I looked around, to see the person smoking offering a cigarette to another in the crowd! By now, quite apart from any consideration of national duty, I had a deep personal interest in not speeding to eternity in some explosive conflagration. Matters were getting urgent and there didn’t seem to be any point in looking for assistance. So I walked up to the smoker and his companion and told them politely but very firmly, that smoking outside was totally prohibited and that it was extremely dangerous.

I added that, that is why no smoking is permitted even in a petrol shed hoping that a familiar example might drive the point home. The man did not appear pleased at this request for the termination of a convivial pleasure which lie was enjoying and which he was about to share with his companion. He looked at me sullenly. I kept on looking him in the eye. Then slowly and reluctantly he stubbed out his cigarette. I thanked him and suggested that he go inside and smoke if he wished to.

There was no reply. To my mind, this episode was a symptom of a deeper disease that was gradually enveloping our country, the disease of a growing political indiscipline, and the evolution of a sense of unbridled political power. Even by 1979, this had grown to such proportions that an armed airport security guard was not prepared to confront a Prime Minister’s political cohort who, in the first instance had no business to be on the tarmac at all.

This progressive deterioration, this increasing growth of indiscipline and intimidation of duly constituted authority by an increase in the tribe of political thugs has had serious repercussions on our society leading to the criminalization of important segments of it. According to available literature, this process has gone quite far in the countries of South Asia, and is substantially responsible for lower progress in these countries, when compared to countries in South-East and East Asia and many other parts of the world.

(Excerpted from In the Pursuit of Governance, autobiography of MDD Pieris) ✍️