Connect with us

Features

Proposed Penal Code amendmentand threat of promotion of sexual abuse of children – IV

Published

on

by Kalyananda Tiranagama
Executive Director
Lawyers for Human Rights and Development

(The third part of this article appeared in The Island of 13 June 2023)

Joining the discussion, Freedom People’s Congress MP Prof. Charitha Herath has said that they would support decriminalization of same-sex relations, if and when the Bill is presented to Parliament.

‘‘We must engage with two domains to achieve the desired results. One is the political domain and the other is the cultural domain. We can change old fashioned political and cultural establishments through constant engagement. ‘’

‘’The technical approach alone will not usher in a meaningful change. That is why I highlight the importance of cultural discussions, as well, to overcome the existing barriers. Sometimes, I feel that these cultural platforms are forgotten by the younger generation,’’ Prof. Herath explained.

Minister Jeevan Thondaman countered the argument that culture was a barrier in achieving non-discrimination for the LGBTQ community in SL. He said ‘’ There is more than enough evidence from ancient history that same sex relations existed and they were very much embraced many, many centuries ago.’’ Thondaman pledged support to legislative reforms decriminalizing same-sex relations.

(E) Existing Penal Code provisions compared with Proposed Amendments

S. 365 of the original Penal Code: ‘’ Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman, or animal shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and shall also be liable to fine.’’

In the Penal Code there is no definition as to what is meant by carnal intercourse against the order of nature. According to Indian cases, acts of anal sex and oral sex were considered as carnal intercourse against the order of nature. The Police had no idea as to what is meant by it. Only where there was a complaint of a person having anal or vaginal sex with an animal, like a cow, goat or a bitch, they acted on it. This happened very, very seldom and this provision remained almost unenforced.

However, with the promotion of tourism in the 1980s, many incidents of foreign tourists having anal sex with male children were reported. The Police used to produce the suspects in courts for committing an offence not under this Section but under S. 365A of the Penal Code, carrying a much less penalty.

By 1995 Amendments, S. 365 was amended by adding a clause making it explicitly applicable to punish sexual abusers of children.

1995 Amendment of S. 365 of the Penal Code –

‘’ Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman, or animal shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and shall also be punished with fine and where the offence is committed by a person over 18 years of age in respect of a person under 16 years of age, the offender shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term not less than 10 years and not exceeding 20 years and with fine and shall also be ordered to pay compensation of an amount determined by court to the person in respect of whom the offence was committed for injuries caused to such person.’’

The new Bill proposes to repeal S. 365 and substitute it with the following section:

‘’Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with an animal, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and shall also liable to fine.’’

Under the proposed Bill, anal or oral sex with any man, woman or child will no longer be considered as carnal intercourse against the order of nature; it will be considered as normal human sexual behaviour, not an offence punishable under the law.

This new Bill proposes to totally repeal S. 365A of the Penal Code, without any substitution.

S. 365A of the original Penal Code:

‘’Any male person who, in public or private, commits or is a party to the commission of, or procures or attempts to precure the commission by any male person, of any act of gross indecency with another male person shall be guilty of an offence and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend up to two years or with fine or both, and shall also be liable to be punished with whipping.’’

This provision covered offences committed by male persons only. 1995 Amendment made it applicable to cover offences committed by both male and female persons and made provision for imposing deterrent penalties for offences committed on children.

1995 Amendment of S. 365A of the Penal Code –

‘’Any person who, in public or private, commits or is a party to the commission of, or procures or attempts to precure the commission by any person, of an act of gross indecency with another person is guilty of an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend up to two years or with fine or both and where the offence is committed by a person over 18 years of age in respect of any person under 16 years of age shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term not less than 10 years and not exceeding 10 years and with fine and shall also be ordered to pay compensation of an amount determined by court to the person in respect of whom the offence was committed for injuries caused to such person.’’

The Supreme Court Determination on the Bill…

Three persons had filed an application – SC SD No. 13 / 2023 – in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of this Bill. Fourteen petitions have been filed by persons seeking Court’s permission to intervene in the Application and the Court has allowed their applications. Out of the 14 intervenient applications, intervenient petitioners only in two applications have supported the petitioners opposing the Bill. Intervenient petitioners in 12 intervenient applications have supported the Bill, opposing the petitioners.

Among the Intervenient petitioners who supported the Bill, there were representatives of four foreign-funded NGOs that have played a leading role in the anti-Sri Lanka campaign carried on in the UN HRC in Geneva making wild allegations against the Govt.

of Sri Lanka since 2006; representatives of 3 or 4 LGBTQ groups; a former Professor in the Faculty of Law, University of Colombo; a leading NGO figure who has served as the President and two other women who have served as members of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka; a women who has served as the President of the National Child Protection Authority; the person who moderated the discussion at the Canadian High Commission and a major activist in the LGBTQ movement in Sri Lanka.

Having examined and analysed the arguments and submissions of the Counsels for the petitioners, intervenient petitioners, respondents and the Attorney General, the Court has made its determination in a lengthy a Judgement. As mentioned in the Judgement:

This Bill proposes to repeal S. 365A in its entirety. ‘‘It must be reiterated that the cumulative effect of the Bill, as captured in Clause (2) (iii), is that sexual orientation of a person shall no longer be a punishable offence, and any consensual conduct between two adult persons of the same sex, irrespective of whether it takes place in private or public, shall no longer be an offence.’’ – P. 10

‘‘The Counsels who appeared for the petitioners opposing the Bill have presented four arguments in support of their position that the provisions of the Bill are violative of Articles 1,3, 4d, 9, 12(1), 13(4), 27(1), 27(2)(d) and 27(13) of the Constitution…It must, perhaps, be stated at the outset that in our view, ex facie, none of the four arguments impinge upon the provisions of Articles 1, 3, 4d, 12(1) and 13(4) of the Constitution….

‘‘The first argument was that the safeguards provided in Ss. 365 and 365A for the protection of children and those under 16 years of age will be taken away by the amendments proposed by the Bill, thereby creating space for exploitation of children and leaving a lacuna in the enforcement of the law relating to offences against children.

‘‘In this connection it was further submitted that:

exposure to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) programmes in schools could impact upon the free decision-making power of children and give rise to transgender children;

the enactment of the Bill would be contrary to the provisions in Article 27(13) which provides that ‘The state shall promote with special care the interests of children and youth, so as to ensure their full development, physical, mental, moral, religious and social, and protect them from exploitation and discrimination.’;

the protection presently afforded to children would be removed, if Ss. 365 and 365A are amended as proposed by the Bill, and that even a person under 16 years of age could engage in sexual activity with a person over 18 years of age.

‘‘ It is in this background that this Court was urged as the upper guardian of children to act in the best interests of the child and declare that the Bill is violative of Article 12(1).

The Stand taken by the State…

‘‘The learned Additional Solicitor General Haripriya Jayasundara, PC, submitted that women and children were the focus of the amendments introduced to the PC in 1995, and that while Ss. 365 and 365A were amended by increasing the punishment where one party was a person below the age of sixteen, S. 365B introduced a new offence titled ‘grave sexual abuse.’ It was further submitted by the Additional Solicitor General that the amendment introduced to S, 365B by the Penal Code Amendment Act No. 29 of 1998 specifically provides that consent with regard to any sexual conduct constituting grave sexual abuse is immaterial where the offence is committed in respect of a child below the age of 16. – vide S. 365B(1)(aa). It was her position that in the event the conduct of any person does not fall within the definition contained in S. 365B, S. 345 of the PC which deals with sexual harassment could be resorted to in order to protect children against any unwelcome sexual advances by words or action. Thus, the contention of the petitioners is unfounded and without any legal basis.’’

It appears that the Court has come to this conclusion on the basis of the submission made by the learned Additional Solicitor General. However, her submission is far from correct. It does not appear from the Judgement as to whether the Counsels of the petitioners made any attempt to show the fallacy of the submissions made by the learned ASG.

‘‘The second argument of the Counsels of the petitioners was that the impugned amendment will dilute the Rule of the Law and result in the life and liberty of the citizens being at risk. This argument is even more tenuous and the petitioners have not been able to connect passing of this Bill to any violation of the Rule of the Law.

‘‘The third argument was that a majority of those with HIV and Aids have history of male or bisexual exposure and that decriminalization of same-sex relationships will give rise to an increase in the number of persons infected with HIV and Aids. It was further submitted that this would have an adverse impact on national security by destroying individuals, families, communities, economic and socio-political institutions, and the military police forces, and that the protection granted by the Chapter on fundamental rights cannot be truly enjoyed without the provision of a safe, secure and protective environment in which a citizen of Sri Lanka may realize the full potential of his existence.

‘‘However, little to nothing has been submitted to this court in support of this proposition other than a singular point that HIV and Aids affect those engaging in same-sex intercourse more than those engaging in hetero-sexual intercourse. Hence, the material placed before this Court by the petitioners does not support their position that HIV and Aids are only prevalent in homo-sexuals or that the proposed amendment will result in an increase in the number of persons afflicted with HIV and Aids.

‘‘Counsels for some of the intervenient petitioners presented three important arguments. The first was that it is not only homo-sexual males who contract HIV, but female sex workers, returnee migrant workers and those who use or inject drugs. The second is that criminalization of homo-sexual conduct between two consenting adult males has only resulted in such persons being marginalised from society and thereby being deprived to access of proper health care which if available would address the spread of HIV and Aids among those persons. The third is that the amendment of S. 365 and S, 365A would facilitate the outreach to individuals and groups at a heightened risk of infection. The intervenient petitioners and the ASG agree on the point that the perception that HIV is disproportionately higher in homo-sexuals is due to the social stigma caused by the criminalization of their relationships…..The Counsels of petitioners did not adduce any scientifically acceptable evidence in support of this line of thinking.

The fourth and final argument was that ‘‘homo-sexual activity is contrary to the principles of Buddhism and therefore violates Article 9 of the Constitution…. The petitioners did not explain the manner in which the decriminalization of one’s sexual orientation derogates from the State’s duty protect and foster Buddha Sasana nor the point of how the proposed amendments are prohibited by or contrary to Buddha Sasana, except to state that it is an offence (parajika) for a Buddhist priest to have sexual relations with another, irrespective of whether the other person is of the same sex or opposite sex.

‘‘On the contrary, Mr. Sanjeewa Jayawardana, PC and Mr. Prasantha Lal de Alwis, PC, appearing for some of the intervenient petitioners submitted that: (a) Bhikkus and Bhikkunis have a separate code of conduct (Vinaya rules) and lay persons are not governed by the rules in the said code; (b) none of the ‘sutras’ focussed on the conduct of lay persons condemn homo-sexuality; (c) while the basic tenets of all religions are that all human beings should be treated fairly and equally irrespective of their circumstances, the fundamental teachings of Buddhism includes tolerance towards and equal treatment of all human beings and that Buddhism does not discriminate persons whose sexual orientation is anything other than hetero-sexual; (d) from whatever parity of reasoning, it would be outrageous for the petitioners to allege that a law which decriminalises homosexuality would result in the undermining of the Buddha Sasana.

‘’We are of the view that the final argument of the petitioners too lacks merit.

‘‘Most of the arguments put forward by and in support of the petitioners are largely based on speculation and may be disposed of summarily. For instance, the argument that children would be harmed by the passing of this Bill or the argument that there shall be an increase in the number of those afflicted with HIV and Aids is specious.’’ – P. 17 (To be continued)



Features

Educational reforms under the NPP government

Published

on

PM Amarasuriya

When the National People’s Power won elections in 2024, there was much hope that the country’s education sector could be made better. Besides the promise of good governance and system change that the NPP offered, this hope was fuelled in part by the appointment of an academic who was at the forefront of the struggle to strengthen free public education and actively involved in the campaign for 6% of GDP for education, as the Minister of Education.

Reforms in the education sector are underway including, a key encouraging move to mainstream vocational education as part of the school curriculum. There has been a marginal increase in budgetary allocations for education. New infrastructure facilities are to be introduced at some universities. The freeze on recruitment is slowly being lifted. However, there is much to be desired in the government’s performance for the past one year. Basic democratic values like rule of law, transparency and consultation, let alone far-reaching systemic changes, such as allocation of more funds for education, combating the neoliberal push towards privatisation and eradication of resource inequalities within the public university system, are not given due importance in the current approach to educational and institutional reforms. This edition of Kuppi Talk focuses on the general educational reforms and the institutional reforms required in the public university system.

General Educational Reforms

Any reform process – whether it is in education or any other area – needs to be shaped by public opinion. A country’s education sector should take into serious consideration the views of students, parents, teachers, educational administrators, associated unions, and the wider public in formulating the reforms. Especially after Aragalaya/Porattam, the country saw a significant political shift. Disillusionment with the traditional political elite mired in corruption, nepotism, racism and self-serving agendas, brought the NPP to power. In such a context, the expectation that any reforms should connect with the people, especially communities that have been systematically excluded from processes of policymaking and governance, is high.

Sadly, the general educational reforms, which are being implemented this year, emerged without much discussion on what recent political changes meant to the people and the education sector. Many felt that the new government should not have been hasty in introducing these reforms in 2026. The present state of affairs calls for self-introspection. As members affiliated to the National Institute of Education (NIE), we must acknowledge that we should have collectively insisted on more time for consultation, deliberations and review.

The government’s conflicts with the teachers’ unions over the extension of school hours, the History teachers’ opposition to the removal of History from the list of compulsory exam subjects for Grades 10 and 11, the discontent with regard to the increase in the number of subjects (now presented as modules) for Grade 6 classes could have been avoided, had there been adequate time spent on consultations.

Given the opposition to the current set of reforms, the government should keep engaging all concerned actors on changes that could be brought about in the coming years. Instead of adopting an intransigent position or ignoring mistakes made, the government and we, the members affiliated to NIE, need to keep the reform process alive, remain open to critique, and treat the latest policy framework, the exams and evaluation methods, and even the modules, as live documents that can be made better, based on constructive feedback and public opinion.

Philosophy and Content

As Ramya Kumar observed in the last edition of Kuppi Talk, there are many refreshing ideas included in the educational philosophy that appears in the latest version of the policy document on educational reforms. But, sadly, it was not possible for curriculum writers to reflect on how this policy could inform the actual content as many of the modules had been sent for printing even before the policy was released to the public. An extensive public discussion of the proposed educational vision would have helped those involved in designing the curriculum to prioritise subjects and disciplines that need to be given importance in a country that went through a protracted civil war and continue to face deep ethno-religious divisions.

While I appreciate the statement made by the Minister of Education, in Parliament, that the histories of minority communities will be included in the new curriculum, a wider public discussion might have pushed the government and NIE to allocate more time for subjects like the Second National Language and include History or a Social Science subject under the list of compulsory subjects. Now that a detailed policy document is in the public domain, there should be a serious conversation about how best the progressive aspects of its philosophy could be made to inform the actual content of the curriculum, its implementation and pedagogy in the future.

University Reforms

Another reform process where the government seems to be going headfirst is the amendments to the Universities Act. While laws need to be revisited and changes be made where required, the existent law should govern the way things are done until a new law comes into place. Recently, a circular was issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC) to halt the process of appointing Heads of Departments and Deans until the proposed amendments to the University Act come into effect. Such an intervention by the UGC is totalitarian and undermines the academic and institutional culture within the public university system and goes against the principle of rule of law.

There have been longstanding demands with regard to institutional reforms such as a transparent process in appointing council members to the public university system, reforms in the schemes of recruitment and selection processes for Vice Chancellor and academics, and the withdrawal of the circular banning teachers of law from practising, to name a few.

The need for a system where the evaluation of applicants for the post of Vice Chancellor cannot be manipulated by the Council members is strongly felt today, given the way some candidates have reportedly been marked up/down in an unfair manner for subjective criteria (e.g., leadership, integrity) in recent selection processes. Likewise, academic recruitment sometimes penalises scholars with inter-disciplinary backgrounds and compartmentalises knowledge within hermetically sealed boundaries. Rigid disciplinary specificities and ambiguities around terms such as ‘subject’ and ‘field’ in the recruitment scheme have been used to reject applicants with outstanding publications by those within the system who saw them as a threat to their positions. The government should work towards reforms in these areas, too, but through adequate deliberations and dialogue.

From Mindless Efficiency to Patient Deliberations

Given the seeming lack of interest on the part of the government to listen to public opinion, in 2026, academics, trade unions and students should be more active in their struggle for transparency and consultations. This struggle has to happen alongside our ongoing struggles for higher allocations for education, better infrastructure, increased recruitment and better work environment. Part of this struggle involves holding the NPP government, UGC, NIE, our universities and schools accountable.

The new year requires us to think about social justice and accountability in education in new ways, also in the light of the Ditwah catastrophe. The decision to cancel the third-term exams, delegating the authority to decide when to re-open affected schools to local educational bodies and Principals and not change the school hours in view of the difficulties caused by Ditwah are commendable moves. But there is much more that we have to do both in addressing the practical needs of the people affected by Ditwah and understanding the implications of this crisis to our framing of education as social justice.

To what extent is our educational policymaking aware of the special concerns of students, teachers and schools affected by Ditwah and other similar catastrophes? Do the authorities know enough about what these students, teachers and institutions expect via educational and institutional reforms? What steps have we taken to find out their priorities and their understanding of educational reforms at this critical juncture? What steps did we take in the past to consult communities that are prone to climate disasters? We should not shy away from decelerating the reform process, if that is what the present moment of climate crisis exacerbated by historical inequalities of class, gender, ethnicity and region in areas like Malaiyaham requires, especially in a situation where deliberations have been found lacking.

This piece calls for slowing-down as a counter practice, a decelerating move against mindless efficiency and speed demanded by neoliberal donor agencies during reform processes at the risk of public opinion, especially of those on the margins. Such framing can help us see openness, patience, accountability, humility and the will to self-introspect and self-correct as our guides in envisioning and implementing educational reforms in the new year and beyond.

(Mahendran Thiruvarangan is a Senior Lecturer attached to the Department of Linguistics & English at the University of Jaffna)

Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies

by Mahendran Thiruvarangan

Continue Reading

Features

Build trust through inclusion and consultation in the New Year

Published

on

Looking back at the past year, the anxiety among influential sections of the population that the NPP government would destabilise the country has been  dispelled. There was concern that the new government with its strong JVP leadership might not be respectful of private property in the Marxist tradition. These fears have not materialised. The government has made a smooth transition, with no upheavals and no breakdown of governance. This continuity deserves recognition. In general, smooth political transitions following decisive electoral change may be identified as early indicators of democratic consolidation rather than disruption.

Democratic legitimacy is strengthened when new governments respect inherited institutions rather than seek to dismantle them wholesale. On this score, the government’s first year has been positive. However, the challenges that the government faces are many.  The government’s failure to appoint an Auditor General, coupled with its determination to push through nominees of its own choosing without accommodating objections from the opposition and civil society, reflects a deeper problem. The government’s position is that the Constitutional Council is making biased decisions when it rejects the president’s nominations to  the position of Auditor General.

Many if not most of the government’s appointments to high positions of state have been drawn from a narrow base of ruling party members and associates. The government’s core entity, the JVP, has had a traditional voter base of no more than 5 percent. Limiting selection of top officials to its members or associates is a recipe for not getting the best. It leaves out a wide swathe of competent persons which is counterproductive to the national interest. Reliance on a narrow pool of party affiliated individuals for senior state appointments limits access to talent and expertise, though the government may have its own reasons.

The recent furor arising out of the Grade 6 children’s textbook having a weblink to a gay dating site appears to be an act of sabotage. Prime Minister (and Education Minister Harini Amarasuriya) has been unfairly and unreasonably targeted for attack by her political opponents. Governments that professionalise the civil service rather than politicise them have been more successful in sustaining reform in the longer term in keeping with the national interest. In Sri Lanka, officers of the state are not allowed to contest elections while in service (Establishment Code) which indicates that they cannot be linked to any party as they have to serve all.

Skilled Leadership

The government is also being subjected to criticism by the Opposition for promising much in its election manifesto and failing to deliver on those promises.  In this regard, the NPP has been no different to the other political parties that contested those elections making extravagant promises.  The problem is that  the economic collapse of 2022 set the country back several years in terms of income and living standards. The economy regressed to the levels of 2018, which was not due to actions of the NPP. Even the most skilled leadership today cannot simply erase those lost years. The economy rebounded to around five percent growth in the past year, but this recovery now faces new problems following Cyclone Ditwah, which wiped out an estimated ten percent of national income.

In the aftermath of the cyclone, the country’s cause for shame lies with the political parties. Rather than coming together to support relief and recovery, many focused on assigning blame and scoring political points, as in the attacks on the prime minister, undermining public confidence in the state apparatus at a moment when trust was essential.  Despite the politically motivated attacks by some, the government needs to stick to the path of inclusiveness in its approach to governance. The sustainability of policy change depends not only on electoral victory but on inclusive processes that are more likely to endure than those imposed by majorities.

Bipartisanship recognises that national rebuilding and reconciliation requires cooperation across political divides. It requires consultation with the opposition and with civil society. Opposition leader Sajith Premadasa has been generally reasonable and constructive in his approach. A broader view  of bipartisanship is that it needs to extend beyond the mainstream opposition to include ethnic and religious minorities. The government’s commitment to equal rights and non-discrimination has had a positive impact. Visible racism has declined, and minorities report feeling physically safer than in the past. These gains should not be underestimated. However, deeper threats to ethnic harmony remain.

The government needs to do more to make national reconciliation practical and rooted in change on the ground rather than symbolic. Political power sharing is central to this task. Minority communities, particularly in the north and east, continue to feel excluded from national development. While they welcome visits and dialogue with national leaders, frustration grows when development promises remain confined to foundation stones and ceremonies. The construction of Buddhist temples in areas with no Buddhist population, justified on claims of historical precedent, is perceived as threatening rather than reconciliatory.

 Wider Polity

The constitutionally mandated devolution framework provided by the Thirteenth Amendment remains the most viable mechanism for addressing minority grievances within a united country. It was mediated by India as a third party to the agreement. The long delayed provincial council elections need to be held without further postponement. Provincial council elections have not been held for seven years. This prolonged suspension undermines both democratic practice and minority confidence. International experience, whether in India and Switzerland, shows that decentralisation is most effective when regional institutions are electorally accountable and operational rather than dormant.

It is not sufficient to treat individuals as equal citizens in the abstract. Democratic equality also requires recognising communities as collective actors with legitimate interests. Power sharing allows communities to make decisions in areas where they form majorities, reducing alienation and strengthening national cohesion. The government’s first year in office saw it acknowledge many of these problems, but acknowledgment has not yet translated into action. Issues relating to missing persons, prolonged detention, land encroachment and the absence of provincial elections remain unresolved. Even in areas where reform has been attempted, such as the repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, the proposed replacement legislation falls short of international human rights standards.

The New Year must be one in which these foundational issues are addressed decisively. If not, problems will fester, get worse and distract the government from engaging fully in the development process. Devolution through the Thirteenth Amendment and credible reconciliation mechanisms must move from rhetoric to implementation. It is reported that a resolution to appoint a select committee of parliament to look into and report on an electoral system under which the provincial council elections will be held will be taken up this week. Similarly, existing institutions such as the Office of Missing Persons and the Office of Reparations need to be empowered to function effectively, while a truth and reconciliation process must be established that commands public confidence.

Trust in institutions requires respect for constitutional processes, trust in society requires inclusive decision making, and trust across communities requires genuine power sharing and accountability. Economic recovery, disaster reconstruction, institutional integrity and ethnic reconciliation are not separate tasks but interlinked tests of democratic governance. The government needs to move beyond reliance on its core supporters and govern in a manner that draws in the wider polity. Its success here will determine not only the sustainability of its reforms but also the country’s prospects for long term stability and unity.

by Jehan Perera

Continue Reading

Features

Not taking responsibility, lack of accountability

Published

on

While agreeing wholeheartedly with most of the sentiments expressed by Dr Geewananda Gunawardhana in his piece “Pharmaceuticals, deaths, and work ethics” (The Island, 5th January), I must take exception to what he stated regarding corruption: “Enough has been said about corruption, and fortunately, the present government is making an effort to curb it. We must give them some time as only the government has changed, not the people”

With every change of government, we have witnessed the scenario of the incoming government going after the corrupt of the previous, punishing a few politicians in the process. This is nothing new. In fact, some governments have gone after high-ranking public servants, too, punishing them on very flimsy grounds. One of the main reasons, if not the main, of the unexpected massive victory at the polls of this government was the promise of eradication of corruption. Whilst claiming credit for convicting some errant politicians, even for cases that commenced before they came to power, how has the NPP government fared? If one considers corruption to be purely financial, then they have done well, so far. Well, even with previous governments they did not commence plundering the wealth of the nation in the first year!

I would argue that dishonesty, even refusal to take responsibility is corruption. Plucking out of retirement and giving plum jobs to those who canvassed key groups, in my opinion, is even worse corruption than some financial malpractices. There is no need to go into the details of Ranwala affairs as much has been written about but the way the government responded does not reassure anyone expecting and hoping for the NPP government to be corruption free.

One of the first important actions of the government was the election of Ranwala as the speaker. When his claimed doctorate was queried and he stepped down to find the certificate, why didn’t AKD give him a time limit to find it? When he could not substantiate obtaining a PhD, even after a year, why didn’t AKD insist that he resigns the parliamentary seat? Had such actions been taken then the NPP can claim credit that the party does not tolerate dishonesty. What an example are we setting for the youth?

Recent road traffic accident involving Ranwala brough to focus this lapse too, in addition to the laughable way the RTA was handled. The police officers investigating could not breathalyse him as they had run out of ‘balloons’ for the breathalyser! His blood and urine alcohol levels were done only after a safe period had elapsed. Not surprisingly, the results were normal! Honestly, does the government believe that anyone with an iota of intelligence would accept the explanation that these were lapses on the part of the police but not due to political interference?

The release of over 300 ‘red-tagged’ containers continues to remain a mystery. The deputy minister of shipping announced loudly that the ministry would take full responsibility but subsequently it turned out that customs is not under the purview of the ministry of shipping. Report on the affair is yet to see the light of day, the only thing that happened being the senior officer in customs that defended the government’s action being appointed the chief! Are these the actions of a government that came to power on the promise of eradication of corruption?

The new year dawned with another headache for the government that promised ‘system change.’  The most important educational reforms in our political history were those introduced by Dr CWW Kannangara which included free education and the establishment of central schools, etc. He did so after a comprehensive study lasting over six years, but the NPP government has been in a rush! Against the advice of many educationists that reforms should be brought after consultation, the government decided it could rush it on its own. It refuses to take responsibility when things go wrong. Heavens, things have started going wrong even before it started! Grade Six English Language module textbook gives a link to make e-buddies. When I clicked that link what I got was a site that stated: “Buddy, Bad Boys Club, Meet Gay Men for fun”!

Australia has already banned social media to children under 15 years and a recent survey showed that nearly two thirds of parents in the UK also favour such a ban but our minister of education wants children as young as ten years to join social media and have e-buddies!

Coming back to the aforesaid website, instead of an internal investigation to find out what went wrong, the Secretary to the Ministry of Education went to the CID. Of course, who is there in the CID? Shani of Ranjan Ramanayake tape fame! He will surely ‘fix’ someone for ‘sabotaging’ educational reforms! Can we say that the NPP government is less corrupt and any better than its predecessors?

by Dr Upul Wijayawardhana

Continue Reading

Trending