Connect with us

Editorial

Power politics and fake causes

Published

on

Tuesday 25th August, 2020

Newly elected Thamil Makkal Thesiya Kuttani MP C. V. Wigneswaran would have us believe that the incumbent SLPP administration is a government of Sinhala Buddhists by Sinhala Buddhists for Sinhala Buddhists. He has said something to this effect in his recent speech in Parliament. The fact that the ruling SLPP has won the local government, presidential and parliamentary elections without the help of the minority parties that consider themselves kingmakers; its support base is confined to the predominantly Sinhala areas and the President, the Prime Minister and ministers were sworn in at places of Buddhist worship may have prompted Wigneswaran to draw that conclusion.

Wigneswaran needs a foil to make himself out to be a saviour of the Tamil people and eat into the TNA’s vote base. He is trying to have his voters believe he is taking on a Sinhala Buddhist government. The SLPP leaders however, will not mind Wigneswaran’s remark, despite its negative connotations; instead, they will use it to win over more votes from the majority community.

There have been quite a few self-declared liberators of different ethnic and religious communities, in this country, and they have even formed political parties to champion their causes and gain political mileage. Among them are some Buddhist monks, who succeeded in securing the support of the majority community to enter Parliament, in the early-noughties; they promised to safeguard the interests of the Sinhala Buddhists, but ended up being a bunch of politicians and lost popular support. Their party, the JHU, has since opted for political coat-tail rides for survival in politics. Some prominent Buddhist monks who banded together purportedly to liberate the Sinhala Buddhists and sought a mandate, at the recently concluded general election, are now at each other’s jugular over a National List slot. Their conduct is unbecoming of Buddhist monks.

The TNA claims to have the liberation of Tamils as its goal. However, the political ambitions of its leaders have taken precedence over its ethno-nationalist agenda as can be seen from its internal dispute over its National List seat, and the serious allegations of electoral fraud that an unsuccessful candidate has levelled against one of its leaders. The growing disillusionment of Tamils with the TNA is evident from the severe erosion of its vote bank; the number of the TNA MPs has dropped from 24, in 2004, to 10. It has lost one seat to the SLFP, of all parties, in its stronghold!

The SLMC, which has evinced a proprietary interest in the Muslim community, and benefits from a block vote, opted for a political marriage of convenience with a previous Rajapaksa government which was also considered a Sinhala-Buddhist administration. It now finds itself in the exalted company of the JHU as a coalition partner of the SJB. One should not be surprised if it joins the incumbent government which, in Wigneswaran’s book, looks after the interests of only the Sinhala-Buddhist community.

Having suffered the worst ever electoral defeat, the UNP is also now planning to endear itself to the majority community in a bid to shore up its vote bank. So much for its much-flaunted liberal outlook! The SJB will be compelled to vie with the UNP to win over the voters in the majority community. There is no other way it can improve its electoral performance.

Our reading of Sri Lankan politics is that the ethno-religious agendas of political parties are not genuine. Going by the manner in which successive governments have let down all communities, we think we have had governments of politicians by politicians for politicians. They may claim to champion various causes, but what really drives their leaders is their insatiable quest for power, which is their religion. Political parties craftily identify themselves with certain ethnic or religious groups to create block votes, which they exploit to capture or retain power. That is the name of the game.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Editorial

Subsidised meals and police guards

Published

on

There was a babble of righteous indignation when new MPs elected to the incumbent Parliament were told during an orientation session that meals served to them at the Diyawanna restaurant cost the taxpayer a cool three thousand bucks per meal though they paid only a relative pittance for what they ate. The figure, which seemed highly unlikely, was later corrected to say that a fish meal cost Rs. 950 to provide while a vegetarian meal cost Rs. 629 with MPs charged Rs. 200 per meal. In a previous comment on this subject, we said that the chances are that the entire food bill in the legislature appears to have been divided by 225 (the number of MPs) to reach the astronomical figure although it is not only the legislators who eat in Parliament. Numerous officials, policemen, the press and sundry others eat there as well knowing that they are being treated to a highly subsidized meal. Although the

Speaker promised to go into the matter and report back, nothing further was heard on the subject. So the people remain ignorant on the true situation and quite willing to believe the worst.

Now the question of the security offered to parliamentarians has cropped up with a couple of Samagi Jana Balavegaya MPs saying that two police guards assigned to them is insufficient. Former Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa, now charged with the responsibility Irrigation, Internal Security, Home Affairs and Disaster Management seems to have struck a responsive chord in the public mind saying that policemen will not be deployed “to carry files and bags of MPs.” He might have added “or answer telephones” because that is also a common chore falling on those cops assigned to security details of parliamentarians. From what the Minister said, the previous four policemen per MP has now been reduced to two and the government did not seem inclined, rightly we believe, to increase this. But there were no questions asked about numbers assigned to “special cases” including ministers, opposition personalities, and former presidents. The minister will surely be embarrassed to reveal the facts as well as the names of the privileged few.

Rajapaksa explained that it was necessary to substantially increase the protection granted to MPs, during the JVPs second adventure in the late eighties when several MPs and other political activists were literally bumped off in cold blood. There were so many of them including several MPs from both sides of the fence and others like Vijaya Kumaranatunga who might have become President as his widow, Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaranatunga, did some years later, Apart from the MPs there were well known trade unionists like PD Wimalasena of the LSSP and LW Panditha of the CP. Other names that readily come to mind include Nandalal Fernando, General Secretary of the UNP and that party’s Chairman Harsha Abeywardene. Older readers might remember the grenade which did not explode flung at Dr. Colvin. R. de Silva through a verandah grill at his Kollupitiya home late in the night.

Then came the LTTE threat which was much more fearsome than its JVP predecessor with the Tigers responsible for the assassination of no less than Rajiv Gandhi, President Premadasa, Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, Gamini Dissanayake, Lalith Athulathmudali, Ministers Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, CV Gooneratne, Ranjan Wijeratne and many more including a large number of Tamil MPs including TULF leaders like Messrs. A. Amirthalingam, M. Sivasithamparam and Tamil Congress Leader Kumar Ponnambalam. Naturally, as Minister Chamal Rajapaksa said, huge resources had to be thrown into protect national leaders and other vulnerable persons at that time. President Chandrika Kumaratunga lost an eye and barely escaped with her life in the last campaign rally she addressed prior to her re-election. An icy chill will run down the spines of all those who remember those terror-filled days. Both the JVP and LTTE terror resulted in an ever ballooning security apparatus like the Presidential, Prime Ministerial and Ministerial Security Divisions of the Police. There are necessarily special units also, like diplomatic protection. Thousands of policemen are assigned for such duties at the expense of regular law enforcement.

The extent of VIP security is usually based on threat perception. But even with such perception going sky high, as in the case of Mr. Lakshman Kadirgamar, and the massive resources deployed, it was not possible to save him from the LTTE sniper who put a bullet through his head having patiently bided his time for probably months. The assassin had been holed up in the unused upper floor of a neighboring residence whose occupants did not know what was going on in a part of their house they never visited. Kadirgamar, typically, did not wish his neighbors harassed in any way and that resulted in his personal security personnel not running a fine tooth comb as they well might have had they not been prevented from so doing.

We say all this in the context of the reality that electors generally react adversely to the perks heaped on representatives sent by them particularly to Parliament. Thus the media is able to raise a great hoo haa about what their MPs are able to eat in the House restaurant and at what price. People naturally rile against security squads, sometimes converted to virtual private armies during extraordinary times, and white-gloved soldiers in VIP motorcades shooing people off the roads to make way for the high and mighty to speed by. The JVP insurrection and the civil war naturally bloated the security apparatus but does it need to remain so for all time now that the threats are gone?

Continue Reading

Editorial

Shameless shirkers

Published

on

Saturday 26th September, 2020

Cynics pooh-poohed the Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority’s boastful claim that Sri Lanka was the Wonder of Asia. But we are convinced of the veracity of that slogan. In fact, this country is not just the Wonder of Asia’; it is the Wonder of the World, for it survived the yahapalana government without becoming a hotbed of ISIS terrorism.

On seeing the shameful conduct of the former rulers and their erstwhile trusted lieutenants, blaming one another for their collective failure to prevent the Easter Sunday carnage, people must be feeling ashamed that they were once ruled by those imbeciles. Under the yahapalana government, national security became nobody’s business and the Defence Ministry a playpen of politicians and mandarins who knew next to nothing about defence; they even did not know what to do with vital intelligence.

Hemasiri Fernando would have us believe that during his tenure as the Defence Secretary, the then President Maithripala Sirisena purposely kept him out of the loop, and, therefore, he should not be held responsible for the circumstances that led to the Easter Sunday carnage. He thinks the blame for the terror strikes should be laid solely on his former boss, Sirisena.

Ex-IGP Pujith Jayasundera says former President Sirisena should take the full responsibility for the yahapalana lapses that enabled the National Thowheed Jamaath (NTJ) terrorists to carry out the Easter Sunday carnage. He insists that he had written to all those below him, informing them of the intelligence warning of the impending attacks, and they should have taken action. He pretends that he did not have full control over the police, and Sirisena interfered with transfers. But as far as we can remember, he controlled the police with an iron fist, and there was no way anyone could bypass him or conceal anything from him. It may be recalled that he ensured that his sil campaign was a success, and went so far as to rough up an elevator operator at the Police Headquarters for not observing sil. It is not possible that anyone would have dared ruffle his feathers. The blame for his subordinates’ failure to take action on the warning should be apportioned to him.

Jayasundera has said his phone was tapped by the SIS, and he was under surveillance while he was the IGP. We thought the yahapalana government did not resort to such measures. No wonder the state intelligence agencies, stuck neck deep in political work, had little time to spy on terrorists and ensure public safety.

SDIG Nilantha Jayawardena claims that, as the State Intelligence Service Chief, he had conveyed the intelligence warning of the terror attacks to everyone in the Defence establishment except President Sirisena. Curiouser and curiouser! It has now been revealed he used to call President Sirisena almost daily.

The entire yahapalana government and the police top brass who stooped so low as to do dirty political work should be held responsible for having created conditions for the rise of Islamic extremism and terror. Their witch hunt against the military and intelligence personnel who had been instrumental in defeating LTTE terrorism brought about a situation where nobody in the intelligence community was willing to go beyond the call of duty to neutralise the NTJ. Time was when intelligence officers sprang into action, upon receiving information about possible terror attacks, and dealt with the terrorists without wasting time on writing memos. If those brave, efficient officers and men, who served the country faithfully, risking as they did life and limb, had not been arrested, harassed or hounded out of their jobs, following the 2015 regime change, Zahran would not have been able to explode even the Kanthankudy motorcycle bomb, which was a dry run of the Easter Sunday bombings.

The yahapalana shirkers responsible for their failure to prevent the Easter Sunday attacks are lucky that they are not living in a country like Saudi Arabia, where a Sri Lankan girl—Rizana Nafeek—who worked as a housemaid was beheaded, in 2013, for the death of a baby, in her care, due to her negligence. Their lapses led to more than 250 deaths.

 

 

Continue Reading

Editorial

What’s in a dress?

Published

on

Friday 25th September, 2020

National Congress MP A. L. M. Athaulla caused quite a stir in Parliament on Tuesday. In he walked wearing a dress, which became something like a red rag to a bull for some MPs, who protested, demanding that he be removed from the Chamber. One of his fellow Muslim MPs shouted from the Opposition benches that his dress looked like the national costume of Afghan males, and demanded that he leave the Chamber forthwith. Athaulla complied, but subsequently the Speaker allowed him to return to his seat after he had said he was wearing a jacket as it was too cold inside the Chamber.

If it is freezing inside the Chamber, then the air conditioners can be set at a higher temperature so that the MPs will feel comfortable, and the Parliament electricity bill can be reduced significantly. However, the MPs protest against Athaulla’s ‘Afghan’ attire left us baffled. What’s in a dress? Do clothes make good MPs? Athaulla’s dress, in our book, was fine. In fact, he looked smart in it.

What matters in Parliament is not an MP’s attire as such but his or her conduct. Only the female MPs and some of their male counterparts act with decorum. Others are nattily dressed in the so-called kapati suit, which is de rigueur, but their conduct is no better than that of ruffians. We saw them in action during the failed constitutional coup in 2018. The Speaker had to be removed to safety when they ran amok, smashing furniture and throwing projectiles and chilli powder. Several MPs in the last Parliament admitted that they had taken money from Arjun Aloysius. According to MP Dayasiri Jayasekera, as many as 118 members of the last Parliament had received funds from Aloysius’ company, Perpetual Treasuries Ltd., which has become a metaphor for fraud owing to its involvement in the Treasury bond scams.

During heated arguments, allegations of drug dealing, etc., are traded liberally in Parliament. The Speaker has to close the public gallery for schoolchildren when MPs resort to fisticuffs and let out streams of raw filth. Among the derogatory terms they exchange freely are ‘gigolo’ and ‘procurer’. Worse, now, there is a murder convict in the House. (Luckily, he has not been made the Justice Minister!) Another MP is in remand prison over the killing of a former lawmaker. Some MPs have a history of backing terrorism.

Allegations of bribery and corruption are often traded across the floor of the House during debates. The new government accuses the Opposition of having within its ranks a bunch of crooks who helped themselves to public funds and were involved in corrupt deals while they were in power; the Opposition would have the public believe that the incumbent administration consists of dozens of rogues who amassed ill-gotten wealth and stashed it away overseas from 2005 to 2015. This being the situation, can anyone be faulted for concluding that our legislature is full of rogues? There are, of course, decent men and women in Parliament, but they are the exception that proves the rule.

The media reported a few years ago that several female members of the last Parliament suffered sexual harassment at the hands of some of their male counterparts. The then Speaker Karu Jayasuriya promised an inquiry, but no action was taken. One can only hope that those randy elements in the garb of MPs have not been re-elected. (Anyway, as people are said to be what they eat, food items known for boosting libido should not be served in the parliamentary canteen, as a precautionary measure, for the sake of the female MPs.)

Meanwhile, are the MPs who frowned on Athaulla’s ‘Afghan’ attire really proud of their Sri Lankan identity and passionate about safeguarding the dignity of Parliament? Computers used in Parliament have been sponsored by China. Only the first-timers in the current Parliament have not benefited from the generosity of China, which organises junkets for MPs (Provincial Councillors and local government members) from time to time. The MPs do not consider it infra dig to benefit from the Chinese largesse. Funds for the parliament information centre came from the US. Not even the MPs who claim to be opposed to the Millennium Challenge Corporation compact, which, they rightly say, is loaded in favour of America, protested against that US-funded project.

When a person does something extremely shameful, it is popularly asked in this country how he or she could walk on the road with clothes on—reddak endan pare behala yanne kohomoda? This is the question that should be posed to those who made an issue of Athaulla’s foreign-looking dress but do not protest against the misconduct of MPs and the shameful practices such as living high on the hog at the expense of the public and panhandling for foreign aid.

Continue Reading

Trending