Connect with us

Features

Universal franchise: Understanding its power and using it correctly

Published

on

Dr. Upatissa Pethiyagoda

It may border on sacrilege to question the validity and purpose of the franchise and the party system in search of “democracy” and “governance.” But looking at the results that have manifested through its exercise in the 73 years since 1948, it is legitimate to entertain doubts on how well the immense powers of the franchise have been understood and applied.

Orderly governance is meant to provide happiness, comfort and security for all citizen. Fairness and equity should dominate. Benefits and burdens should be equally shared, and aim at the contentment of the citizens without curtailing human freedom. Democracy, despite shortcomings, is judged to be the best way. Periodic elections and the free exercise of the franchise (voting) is paramount.

Let us examine these lofty intentions in the local context. We pride ourselves on being the first in Asia (?) to adopt universal suffrage – even ahead of our colonial masters. Have we done well in our pioneering effort, or are we showing signs of electoral senility?

Democracy has been cynically defined as a process based on the fond belief, that by the exercise of the franchise (voting), we somehow transform the collective stupidity of the many, into wisdom of the chosen few. Some may say justifiably, that in our case, it seems that “the stupidity of the many gets concentrated in the elected few”. But let that pass for now.

Let us ask ourselves how the theory fits the truth:

(i) The majority of us have not had the benefit of secondary education (leaving aside tertiary) and are not diehard members of political parties.

(ii) We are therefore compelled to vote rather “erratically” and therefore the system is open to unpredictable “swings”.

(iii) We generally regard the successful candidates as potential vagabonds, or scoundrel nitwits.

(iv) Our choices are based on personal fancy and the talks of “policy” are poppycock. “Unuth ekai munuth ekai “ We may call it the “Cahoot principle.” The essence of this proposition is they are all in tow, and the displayed rivalry is fake. The real conflict is Politicians vs. The People. When confusing situations arise, if one applies the fundamental truth of “cahootism,” the mist often clears.

Under the present system, inefficiency, ignorance, poor quality and low educational accomplishments in our pinnacle of Parliament, is inevitable. In a recent comment, the Speaker has lamented the poor use of the parliament library which is reputed to be among the best in the country. He says that there have been only some 330, of which 120 have been novels (what are they doing in a parliamentary library anyway?) borrowings (how many unreturned?).

Nepotism aggravates the situation. A simple “blood line test” may reveal much. Some have suggested setting minimum educational standards for entry. Give it to Parliament, as a superb example of “lateral thinking”. Give enough fellows doctorates and thus bring up the “average”! Clever but not clever enough. One notices that none of these ‘virgin entrants’ to erudition disclose the awarding institution – no BA (Oxon) or D.Sc (Lond). May be D.Phil (EC) – “Erronis causa”. Are these (sprouting like mushrooms) counterfeit? Are these stellar records transferable, to bring up the average? Is there some hanky panky going on?

Another quaint creature is the political party myth. Ask any fellow ‘why’ he votes this way or that and before long, the hollow word “policy” will enter. Then if you were to ask “What policy difference exist between, say, the “Gentlemen vs Players “? After a pronounced silence, your conversation partner will slither off to a different circle!

If you ask any “typical” voter for his choice and why, the majority response would be along the lines- “I am for so-and so’s man”. Party- wise “we have always been … so and so’s”, or habit. The kepuwath- nil/kola/rathu chant is the basis.

A certain firm felt that their recruitment practices could do with technical input. So, they brought in a human relations expert to ‘sit in’ on one interview for a secretarial position. There was the usual procession of hopefuls. As the interviews ended, the expert was invited to state his ratings. Without batting an embarrassed eyelid, he declared “I pick the one in the pink, tight fitting sweater, second place to the one in black slacks with shapely ankles”. So much so for selection criteria!

On a personal note, I had the opportunity to sit in on an interview board for the selection of a researcher for a top US university. Each candidate in turn was asked “In twenty minutes, please tell us what you have done with your life up until now?” What a clever departure from the norm!

At elections during our youth, there were coloured boxes, with each candidate assigned one. You just chucked your ballot paper (no scratching, no ticking of boxes etc.) into the box of your choice. Thus you had only the character, background, honesty and quality of the candidates to consider. As a result, you had the Senanayakes, Bandaranaikes, Kotelawalas, Jayatillakas, Molamures, Colvins and Keunamans and many more truly honourable people between whom you made your choice. No suspect, loud-mouthed, uncouth, ill-educated rowdies, thieves, murderers, drug lords, pick-pockets, chain snatchers and such other disreputable vagabonds, adorning our current political scene.

Please do not get me wrong, there are several exceptions capable of contributing much to our society – medicos, lawyers, economists, professors, servicemen, ex-diplomats, businessmen, eloquent debaters and men of dignity and civility . These are persons, with whom one could be happy to be seen sharing a restaurant meal, (particularly with them picking up the tab!)

Please follow this. As long as the party system and the party whip operates, and secret voting is out, and even a ridiculous voice vote decides, where is this so-called democracy?

As long as the present systems prevail, our “democracy” has little meaning. Of what use is candidate quality, secret ballot and rituals of “assembly”, debates, votes and budgets, if all that is required is for a puppet to hold up his hand from time to time, as ordained by the party hierarchy? Why then look for excellence?

In the present context, therefore, what is the use of parliamentary debate, educated members, suitability and worth, if they are meant to be mere cyphers putting up their hands in accordance with the party whip rather than by a free vote? What is the logic in confidentiality at the periphery (at polling booths) and mechanical subservience (forced vote) at the end (Parliament)? Why then is the need to look for excellence when all that is needed is to raise ones hand or press the button of a fancy electronic system when ordered to do so? Only double amputees need be excluded. Dual Amputees – No. Dual Citizens – perhaps.

The operative word is “logic” – whoever said that logic is a part of democracy? The abandonment of the concept of confidentiality in parliamentary voting is difficult to understand, until you consider that this may be the best way to show up the ‘bought’ voters; also the ‘buyable’ ones, or the promised cross-overs who didn’t, the ones who took the bribes but betrayed? Parliament provides the shrouds to those who can judge.

The few other institutions, where I have heard, “services” are clearly bought COD — is prostitution. But, would anyone dare suggest that the luxurious Diyawanna Palace is the world’s “best appointed brothel”? Of course not! It was once stated (by Lee Kuan Yew) that “In Sri Lanka, elections are an auction of non-existent assets”.

In the same spirit, I yield originality to President Ronald Reagan, who said “I have been told that politics is the second oldest profession in the world. The longer I remain in it, the more do I realize how closely it resembles the first”.

What point is there in debates, budget or other? (“Communication without transformation is gossip” – Tarzie Vitachchi). Why indeed have a budget at all, when supplementary votes are there to be fiddled?

But of course there are the bountiful minister’s tea party at speech end the sumptuous speaker’s repast at debate’s end, where birds of a feather can flock together, revel in conviviality, laughing together at the clots, who believe that they actually oppose one another? Cannot the asinines voting public learn to enjoy plays and circuses? Cannot they exult at their ministers and proxies, standing in as “surrogate hosts” on their behalf?

So far as I am concerned, political parties are mostly a meaningless pretense, house debates are mostly of no substance, (welcome exceptions are from the JVP members who seem to study their subject, make their points elegantly, unprovoked by rowdy interruptions and sometimes delivering devastating come-backs), The rest are to my mind, pretty dull and vacuous nonsense.

So, to me political parties are irrelevant, while character and decency are non-negotiable. Much of the rituals are meaningless and fluffy. I smirk at the way they address each other as “Honourable”, only moments later to denounce each other in the vilest filth! I graciously allow them that harmless privilege, as long as I am “included out.” So Parliament equals pantomime. I am tickled by the recent statement by Ranil W, that new rules of conduct are necessary for Parliament. We recall the “Kawda hora” performance!

If true character of an institution or person manifest best in times of distress, then there could be no better time than the present, for Parliament and its Members, thus giving me even the slightest chance to revise my (generally) low esteem.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Features

Trump’s tariffs, AKD’s gazette and Sri Lanka’s diplomatic slumber

Published

on

“We are rather respectable in Colombo. We go to bed fairly early, and we remain there till morning. “

According to Sri Lanka’s diplomatic folklore, the late S.W. R. D. Bandaranaike uttered these words while explaining the reasons for Sri Lanka’s abstention on the UN resolution condemning the Soviet invasion of Hungary. Apparently, SWRD’s foreign ministry officials were asleep at home when the diplomatic cable seeking instructions was received from New York. In those days, there were no cell phones, Internet, or even fax or telex machines. The diplomatic cables were sent through post offices. Decoding them was a slow and time-consuming process. Thus, the government could not provide appropriate instructions to our mission in New York in time, and the Sri Lankan delegation abstained on that sensitive UN vote.

Sri Lanka’s Absence from Section 301 Consultations

But then, how does one explain Sri Lanka’s absence from the crucial bilateral consultation held in Washington by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) during March-April on “Forced Labour” under the Section 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974? Didn’t our foreign and trade ministries send appropriate instructions to Washington in time? Even if the instructions from the foreign ministry were transmitted to our embassy in Washington by pigeon carriers, there was enough time for Sri Lanka to participate in those meetings.

In March, the USTR initiated these 301 investigations on 60 trading partners, and invited all of them for confidential consultations. Out of the 60, 46 participated in these consultations. Sri Lanka was not one of them. Other countries that didn’t participate in these consultations included China, Russia, and Venezuela! In addition to that, the Section 301 Committee conducted a public hearing with interested parties on April 28 and 29. Washington-based diplomats, representatives from few trade ministries as well as representatives from many foreign trade associations and chambers participated in these hearings. Sri Lanka was once again conspicuously absent.

As a result, when the USTR published the proposed forced labour tariffs on June 2nd, Sri Lanka ended up with a 12.5% duty. Pakistani and Indonesian diplomats participated in these consultations and took appropriate follow-up measures, and managed to enter the 10% duty category. As even a threat of a modest tariff hike could disrupt supply chains and reduce competitiveness, particularly in an industry such as garments, I discussed this issue on 15 June and underscored the importance of Sri Lanka’s participation at the next hearing, which was scheduled to be held from July 7th .

Awakening from Diplomatic Slumber and AKD’s Gazette

Fortunately, Sri Lanka finally awoke from weeks of diplomatic slumber, and Ambassador Mahinda Samarasinghe participated in the public hearing on 9 July, and promised, “…. · We have agreed to the text in our negotiations with the USTR on forced labour, …. The gazette as we speak is being printed and I’m getting the gazette tomorrow morning, and the gazette will be shared with USTR as I get it“.

As promised, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake issued a gazette on 10 July banning the imports of goods produced by forced labour. These new regulations are very similar to what Pakistan and Indonesia enacted in April, after their consultations with USTR in March. Why couldn’t we do it in April? Why did we wait till the very last minute?

Challenges ahead

“War is too important to be left to generals alone,” is a famous saying attributed to former French Premier Georges Clemenceau. Similarly, monitoring our main markets is too important to be left to diplomats alone. The United States is the largest single-country market for Sri Lanka. Therefore, Sri Lankan trade chambers and associations should become more proactive in these markets and participate in these events. For example, the chairman of the Pakistani apparel exporters association participated in the April hearings. Similarly, representatives from the Indian Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority, the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, the Confederation of Indian Industry, and Reliance Industries also participated in July hearings. At an event where each speaker is given only five minutes (strictly enforced), having a number of speakers from a country is an advantage. The presence of industry representatives in these kinds of events also help them understand the market dynamics and the future challenges. This is important, particularly because there will be many more challenges with Trump’s tariffs.

With the gazette issued on 10 July, Sri Lanka has imposed a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labour. Now, the challenge will be to effectively enforce the prohibition. And what are the goods produced with forced labour? The USTR list only focuses on aluminum, cotton, electronics, lithium-ion batteries, rice, and tobacco. However, according to the U.S. Department of Labour, the list is much longer. Hence, this list may change continuously during the next two years and tariffs may fluctuate once again.

So, this is definitely not the time to slumber.

(The writer, a retired public servant, can be reached at senadhiragomi@gmail.com)

by Gomi Senadhira ✍️

Continue Reading

Features

Tales of Mystery and Suspense 10 Casino for Sale

Published

on

After the overwhelming grotesquerie of J K Rowling’s latest Cormoran Strike novel (written, I should have noted, as the others were, under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith), I thought I should return to the world of fun, and also a much shorter description since this thriller moves quickly without the layers of detail that Rowling engages in.

I then move to the second comic thriller by Caryl Brahms and S J Simon. This, their second story to feature Vladimir Stroganoff and Adam Quill, was Casino for Sale, as lunatic a romp as the first, though without the emphasis on the ballet that characterized A Bullet in the Ballet.

This one begins with the impresario Stroganoff buying a casino cheap from Baron Sam de Rabinovich, only to find that it was a rundown place, not the grand casino of La Bazouche, a resort on the Frenc+h Riviera, as he had initially thought. The grand one belonged to Lord Buttonhooke, and Stroganoff could  not compete, until he thought of bringing the Ballet Stroganoff to the casino – which of course leads to Buttonhooke deciding to have ballet performances in his Casino too.

Stroganoff invites Quill to visit him, which Quill decides to do since he has left Scotland Yard, having come into a legacy. No one believes this, and he has to face questions as to what he did to have been sacked, with sympathy for having been found out.

Caryl and Simon

The day he arrives in La Bazouche there is a murder, of a vitriolic critic called Citrolo, in Stroganoff’s office. He had been going to write a damning review of the opening night of the ballet and Stroganoff, when he realizes Citrolo cannot be swayed, drugs him and dictates the review himself to the papers. He leaves Citrolo sleeping and finds him shot the next morning, whereupon he decides to muddy the waters and leave a suicide note and lots of other murder weapons. So much overkill, as it were, of course ensures that he is arrested.

But the excitable French detective who makes the arrest follows up his suggestion that Buttonhooke was also involved, and so the two casino owners find themselves in cells next door to each other, with the detective Gustave quite happy to provide creature comforts for a fee.

Quill decides he must investigate, and finds Gustave most cooperative, since he has a laid back attitude to work. So it is Quill that finds a notebook which makes it clear Citrolo is an accomplished blackmailer, and that there are lots of possible murderers, including Stroganoff’s croupier, who was crooked, Rabinovich, who was now working for Buttonhooke, a confidence trickster called Kurt Kukumber, whose prospectus for a dud gold mine was found in the office and Prince Alexis Artishok who was engaged in a deal to buy diamonds from the ballerina Dyra Dyrakova.

Stroganoff had been trying to get Dyrakova to dance for him, but having done so previously she had refused. But then to Stroganoff’s chagrin she agreed to dance for Buttonhooke. The clearly crooked Artishok had told Buttonhooke’s mistress Sadie Souse, who was not very bright, that Dyrakova possessed diamonds she was willing to sell cheap, and Sadie was determined to have them.

Quill meanwhile finds out that there was a secret passage to Stroganoff’s office, the obvious solution to what had begun as a locked room mystery, and that this was known by almost everyone apart from Stroganoff himself. And then Rabinovich is murdered, just after Gustave had released his two original suspects, leading him to blame Quill for having insisted on that and thus allowing them to kill again.

Soon afterwards Dyrakova arrives, and the town is full of posters announcing that she will appear in the casinos, elaborate posters for either one, since Stroganoff is determined that she will dance for him, and if she does not come willingly, he has devised a scheme to make her do so unwillingly. So, though Buttonhooke has her taken off to his yacht immediately she arrives at the station, Quill along with Arenskaya gets her into a launch and to Stroganoff’s casino, where she performs to tumultuous applause, not knowing for whom she is dancing.

When Quill asked her about the diamonds, she said she had sold them long ago, and that gave Quill the solution to the mystery. Rabinovich had known about this, and Artishok had killed him to prevent Sadie learning it from him, he had killed Citrolo who had recognized him for an accomplished card sharper, not a Russian prince at all. But before he is arrested, he gets away in a boat, and the police launch that pursues him is on the point of catching him up when it runs out of petrol.

Again, lots of excitement, and entertaining references  – Gustave grows marrows – and if not quite as brilliant as its predecessor, Casino was certainly a delightful read.

Continue Reading

Features

The challenge of being positive about SAARC

Published

on

The RCSS forum addressed by SAARC Secretary General Ambassador Md. Golam Sarwar in progress. (Pic courtesy RCSS)

It was a few years back that a former President of Sri Lanka took it on himself to pronounce SAARC ‘dead’. Since then there have been other sections of Sri Lankan opinion that have joined the critics of SAARC and taken the solemn stance that SAARC has indeed died what may be called a natural death.

Their fatalism is understandable. SAARC has failed to meet at heads of government or state level for the past several years to take the SAARC process notably forward. Regional cooperation has more or less been only an appealing idea. No substantive concrete projects have taken off to make the idea a hard reality. ‘Inner paralysis’ seems to be SAARC’s lot. Hence the fatalism in these circles.

However, being one of the worst cash-strapped regions of the world and a teemingly populated one with people virtually left to their devices, what choices do the ‘SAARC Eight’ have other than to try their best to band together and continue with their cooperation efforts, however small they may be?

There is no escaping the mounting debt trap for many of these countries and bankrupt Sri Lanka is a glaring example, but ‘throwing in the towel’ and abandoning themselves entirely to the diktats of the strongest economies and their agencies will prove a ‘living death’ for many countries in the SAARC fold.

The gains may be meagre but giving-up on SAARC cooperation in full would prove self-defeating for the organization and South Asia. Right now, the collective intention ought to be to salvage what the region could from the tenuous cooperative efforts. Moreover, such initiatives could go some distance to generate a degree of goodwill among the Eight and help in sustaining a dialogue process.

Given this backdrop it proved ‘a stich in time’ for the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo, to recently host the SAARC Secretary General Ambassador Md. Golam Sarwar to a round table discussion on the unifying potential of SAARC and its future possibilities, besides other related issue areas.

Held on June 24th and moderated by RCSS Executive Director and former ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha, the forum brought together a vibrant, wide ranging audience comprising academicians, diplomats, senior public servants, civil society activists and many others. Following the presentation by Ambassador Golam Sarwar titled, ‘Reigniting SAARC: Achievements, Challenges and the Way Ahead’, a lively Q&A followed.

The above forum could be described as an act of lighting the proverbial ‘candle’ rather than ‘cursing the darkness.’ It surely is a ‘darkness’ that could be seen as daunting considering that the region’s pivotal powers, India and Pakistan, are failing to act in a spirit of accord but are engaged in bitter finger-pointing on a number of questions of vital importance to SAARC.

On the other hand, what is the rest of the region doing to bring the above sides together? It is disappointing that to date the rest of SAARC has failed to launch a major diplomatic drive to bring peace between the feuding regional heavyweights. It needs to act without delay and establish its earnestness and this effort would need to prove SAARC’s staying power in the unfolding months and even years.

In assessing SAARC’s seeming failure local opinion in particular has failed to factor in what could be described as weak leadership. Since Sheikh Mujibur Rahman of Bangladesh, the founding father of SAARC, the region has failed to produce a visionary leader who could advance the SAARC cause with charisma and drive.

Among other reasons, weak leadership accounts considerably for the faltering and stuttering status, as it were, of SAARC. Badly needed are leaders who could go the extra mile, think less of narrow national interests and work diligently towards the collective well being of the region but SAARC’s millions of ordinary people have been made to wait in vain for leaders of such stature. Instead, they have been burdened with politicians who seem to be relishing the apparently moribund state of SAARC.

Looking back, it could be said that it was the dynamic leadership factor that led to the launching of the Non-Aligned Movement and for its sustenance for a few decades. True, it could be seen in some quarters that NAM is no more, but as in the case of SAARC, the former too has been unfortunate to be burdened over the years with politicians who lack the vision and drive to unflaggingly advance the fortunes of the South. NAM and SAARC lack the dynamism and vision of leaders of the stature of Jawaharlal Nehru, for example, to give them the required guidance and intellectual depth.

The reasons are complex for there not being among us currently political leaders with the vision and the steadfast commitment to advance the legitimate interests of the South. However, it could be stated with conviction that the majority of Southern leaders have too easily caved in to the demands of the global North and its financial agencies.

These leaders have failed to see, for instance, that the largely market economy oriented Northern governments would not view with favour a centrist economic model that attaches priority to the interests of the dis-empowered publics of the South. This realization ought to have dawned on the current government in Sri Lanka, for instance, some while ago but it has no choice but to abide by IMF dictates since economic survival at present is unthinkable without the latter’s succour.

Accordingly for SAARC this should be the time for some soul-searching. Priority needs to be attached to ending the feuding between India and Pakistan since at present the material fortunes of the region hinge largely on these regional giants giving peaceful relations among them a try. This is no easy challenge to meet but some daring, visionary diplomacy needs to take hold among the rest of SAARC.

There is some sense in SAARC bringing the peoples of the region together through programs that address their best collective interests. A meeting of minds among SAARC nations could enable SAARC and its agencies to build a region-wide people’s movement for progressive political and economic change that could in turn lead to the region’s political leaders sensitizing themselves more to the neglected needs of their publics.

However, the time is ‘now’ for the initiation of these progressive changes and the voice of SAARC well wishers would need to drown out those of their critics.

Continue Reading

Trending