India, Nepal take firm stand against communalism and religious bigotry

Narendra Modi-August 19, 2015, 12:00 pm

But it need hardly be said that people’s participation is central and decisive to constitution-making if such constitutions are to be democratic in character. Once apartheid was dismantled in South Africa two decades ago, the new government of the country launched a country-wide public consultation to obtain the views of the South African people on what should constitute the content of the post-apartheid constitution. This was how the democratic process was energized and upgraded in South Africa. Such democratic exercises need to be seen as crucial by particularly plural societies.

A crucial public consultation is currently underway in Nepal on constitution-building which we in Sri Lanka have not seen the like of, although we fancy ourselves to have been politically independent since 1948. The Nepal authorities are taking a relatively trail-blazing step in sounding out the Nepalase people on issues such as secularism and democratic accountability and we Sri Lankans need to frankly admit that our opinions as civilians on such questions have never been directly ascertained by Sri Lankan governments over the decades.

For example, have Lankan governments ever put to us the following questions in public opinion surveys and the like: Are you for or against secularism? Are you are you not supportive of the ‘mixing’ of politics and religion? The answer to this poser is, of course, an emphatic ‘No’ because the public of Sri Lanka has never been directly and openly asked for its views on such issues by the country’s ‘rulers’. Leave alone our being consulted on questions of this kind by governments, these all-important matters hardly make an entry to public discussion on governance issues and are not heard of even at election time.

The parliamentary poll just concluded in this country was no exception to this de-spiriting tendency of important political and public actors deftly avoiding crucial issues, although Sri Lanka is no stranger to ethnic and religious friction of the worst kind. How is political development possible in a country which does not freely and constructively discuss issues that are central to governance? This is just one crucial question which warrants urgent answering. To be sure, there is no end to ‘discourse’ of the political talk show kind and kindred time-consuming polemical verbal exchanges in sections of the media, but these seldom or never touch on the vital questions in democracy that need to be raised and discussed.

However, Nepal is proving to be far ahead of Sri Lanka in democratic development by going directly to the people and obtaining their views on governance issues. If these views go to form the substance of the Nepalese constitution, the position could be taken that the people have had a huge ‘say’ in the drafting of the country’s constitution. This is participatory democracy in action. Alas, we the Lankan public cannot say we have played a decisive role in framing our constitution. That role has been religiously preserved for only politicians.

Sri Lanka has done well to vote in a parliament, on January 17, which is representative of the totality of our communities, languages and religions and we would probably have a ‘national government’ which reflects such diversity, but the people would need to be brought in more directly to the governing process, if democratic governance is to be upgraded in Sri Lanka. Participatory governance should be strongly promoted by the state and the people closely consulted on questions that go to the heart of democratic development.

It is plain to see that communalism was chief among the factors that led to the undoing of the repressive Mahinda Rajapaksa administration in Sri Lanka, on January 8 this year. Another lesson which unfurled in the Rajapaksa years was that no state with even pretensions to democratic practice could turn a blind eye to communalism and flirt with its apologists and practitioners. Equality in all its dimensions constitutes the heart of democracy and a state cannot pay lip service to equality and profess democracy while promoting racial hatred and religious intolerance, as happened prior to January 8 in this country in the Rajapaksa years. Such deviousness on the part of rulers generates major ‘contradictions’ and divisions which lead to the intensification of conflicts within states, which in turn accelerates their destabilization and fragmentation.

If the polls result of August 17 has taught Sri Lanka one lesson, it is that in pluralistic polities, such as our’s, it is coalition governments or ‘national governments’, if such terminology is preferred, which encompass all sections of local publics and their representatives, which would serve such societies best. That is, power sharing among communities is one of the best safeguards against social divisions which would bring about national fragmentation. Besides, such arrangements would ensure the full flowering of democracy.

In this regard also, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is proving exemplary. On the occasion of India’s 69th Independence Day celebrations recently the Prime Minister said: ‘Be it the poison of casteism or the frenzy of communalism, they have no place in the country and should not be allowed to grow. These ills have to be eradicated through the nectar of development’. This is putting it plainly and unambiguously and national political leaders the world over need to make their position clear on issues, such as, communalism in the same forthright manner. Besides, of course, all relevant practical steps need to be taken to wipe out the ills referred to.

On the question of managing ethnic and religious tensions, states could begin by fostering confidence-building measures among communities. The new government in Sri Lanka, for example, could outlaw communalism in all its manifestations and ban the use of socially destabilizing slogans during elections. State Heads and other personnel cannot be content by merely paying lip-service to ethnic and religious equality and harmony. The institutional mechanisms, laws and norms should be established and rendered operational for the containment of ills, such as, racism and religious hatred. The opportunity has just offered itself in Sri Lanka, in the form of a broad-based government, to bring about these remedial measures aimed at clinching durable ethnic and religious harmony.