Hypocrites holding betel leaves

Editorial-October 12, 2014

Promises, for politicians ensconced in power, are like the pie crust—made to be broken. The incumbent dispensation solemnly pledged, years ago, to fight alcoholism and introduced an ambitious programme, Mathata Thitha. But, its top guns get sozzled to the gills and shift the jaws of diplomats at social gatherings, urinate into swimming pools at hotels and commit assault and battery or even murder and rape.

The government also endeared itself to the public, especially female voters, by taking some action to discourage smoking. But, it has refused to go the whole hog and achieve its goal. On Friday, making a mockery of its anti-tobacco campaign, it torpedoed a Bill presented by UNP MP Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe, seeking to plug several loopholes in the existing laws so that tough measures could be adopted against tobacco companies without leaving room for judicial interventions.

The government says it has voted against the Bill out of respect for a Supreme Court decision on pictorial warnings on cigarette packets. Nothing is more ridiculous than this claim! How come making or amending laws amount to an act of disrespect for the judiciary?

True, there have been instances where the Supreme Court, under some whimsical Chief Justices with massive egos, overstepped its limits and tried to usurp powers and functions of other institutions. Its stay order in 2001 on the then Speaker Anura Bandaranaike to prevent him from appointing a Parliamentary Select Committee to impeach the then Chief Justice Sarath N Silva is a case in point. But, never has the Supreme Court looked askance at laws being made or amended by Parliament for the benefit of the public. On the other hand, how can a government which has hounded a chief justice out of her job because of, among other things, a Supreme Court decision on the Divineguma Bill—claim that it has any respect for the apex court?

As for the much talked about anti-tobacco pictorial warnings, the government—not Minister of Health Maithripala Sirisena, who is helpless—has been running with the hare and hunting with the hounds. On an earlier occasion the UPFA had to vote in Parliament for Minister Sirisena’s move to have warnings printed on 80 percent of the display areas of cigarette packets because it turned out to be a case of Hobson’s choice for it with the Opposition extending its unconditional support for the minister.

The government has stooped so low as to seek financial assistance from the tobacco industry to build police stations, schools and even pilgrims’ rests at historical Buddhist temples. The Supreme Court order that the display area of cigarette packets carrying pictorial warnings be reduced from 80 percent to 60 percent must have warmed the cockles of government politicians’ hearts. The judiciary did what they did not dare do themselves for fear of an adverse political fallout.

MP Rajapakshe should be highly commended for having exposed the government’s duplicity. The UPFA worthies including the self-appointed defenders of Buddhism and the nation who bellow rhetoric condemning multinationals for poisoning food with agrochemicals have proved once again they are only a bunch of hypocrites. They are left with only betel leaves to cover their nudity.

The state must be able to warn the public against the ill-effects of anything, especially food they consume the way it deems fit and take action to protect them. On no grounds must this right be compromised to appease anyone. On Feb.18, 2014 Health Minister Maithripala Sirisena revealed in Parliament that smoking killed more than 20,000 people in Sri Lanka annually and more than 20 percent of hospital beds were occupied by patients suffering from various diseases caused by smoking and alcohol. The onus is on the government to do everything in its power to employ effective methods raise the awareness of the youth and children of the dangers of smoking and explode myths being propagated by the tobacco industry to lure them. Half-hearted measures won’t do.

At this rate the day may not be far off when undertakers demand that the danger signs on either side of highways be removed or the sizes thereof be reduced drastically because those warnings have affected their business adversely. Politicians in power wouldn’t scruple to consider even such a demand if there was money in it for them!