TNA’s Decision Sensible: Vote For The Better Candidate, For There Is Never A Perfect Candidate
By Aahithyan Ratnam -
The TNA’s Mavai Senathirajah has announced that they will not boycott the election. It shows the moderate credentials of the party. On the other hand the rabid “Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam, the leader of Tamil National Peoples [sic.] Front (TNPF) on Thursday (18) addressing the media called on the Tamil people to boycott Sri Lanka’s presidential election next month, stating that the policies in relation to the Tamil question of the common opposition coalition did not differ from that [sic.] of the ruling regime.” (EyeSriLanka, Dec. 19, 2014)
In any election there is never a perfect candidate. We always vote for whoever is better than the others. By asking the Tamil people to boycott the elections, the TNPF is effectively asking us to treat candidates with flaws as equally rejectable when one might be slightly flawed and the other badly flawed. No one is perfect. But President Rajapaksa and Mr. Sirisena are certainly not equally bad. We must vote for the person who is better; for whoever is less flawed. By calling for a boycott the TNPF is favoring Mahinda Rajapaksa who is abominably worse for Tamils.
The TNA as a mature party with experience sees this. I feel confident that once Mr. R. Sampanthan, the TNA leader, returns from his medical treatment abroad, the party will endorse the common opposition candidate.
President Rajapaksa has a long list of negatives behind him – genocide, communalism (against Tamils, Muslims and Christian evangelicals), corruption, authoritarianism, family bandyism, favoritism, judicial meddling and so on, ad nauseam. There is really no one in his UPFA to balance these tendencies inimical to democratic governance. Read More
Lalith Weeratunge; The Purohithayā
BBy Rajiva Wijesinha -December 22, 2014
Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha MP
On the old Bibilical adage that, from him to whom much is given, much is expected, the most reprehensible of those on whom the President relied was his Secretary, Lalith Weeratunge. But in addition to his undoubted intelligence and administrative abilities, there was another factor which led to high expectations. This was that, whereas all the others whose influence has been described were exercising this to fulfil their own agendas, with Lalith it was never doubted that he saw himself as only serving the purposes of the President.
An exception could be made with regard to the Secretary of Defence, in that it could be argued his agenda was not intended for his own benefit, as opposed to the other five whose ambitions have been noted. But increasingly during the President’s second term in office Gotabaya Rajapaksa began to see himself as fulfilling a purpose, albeit idealistic, that was at odds with what his brother intended. It was almost as though, having previously claimed that he could win the war but the political solution had to come from elsewhere, he had begun to think that his role was crucial for any acceptable political settlement. So he even directly criticized his brother, for instance by arguing that Northern Provincial Council elections should not be held, or by allowing crude attacks on the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission on the Defence Ministry website.
