Downplaying Of Appointment Of Ranjan Hulugalle As Lake House Finance Director

By Amrit Muttukumaru –APRIL 1, 2019

Mr. Ranjit Wijewardene

Chairman,

Wijeya Newspapers Limited

Dear Mr. Wijewardene,

Downplaying of Appointment of Ranjan Hulugalle as Lake House Finance Director

Ranjit Wijewardene

The imprudent appointment of Ranjan Hulugalle as Finance Director of state-controlled print media publishing company ‘Lake House’ by your son Ruwan Wijewardene, Minister of Mass Media was severely criticized in Parliament last week by JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake. He alleged that in the context of Ranjan Hulugalle (i) being a former director of Perpetual Treasuries Limited (PTL) the Primary Dealer at the centre of the egregious Treasury Bond Scam (ii) his Passport being “impounded by courts over the bond scam investigation” he should never have been appointed to this position. Dissanayake also alleged that Hulugalle suppressing in his Bio Data the fact that he was a director of PTL raises questions on a possible hidden agendaleading to his appointment.

The JVP leader also raised the issue of ‘conflict of interest’ in your son’s appointment as Minister of Mass Media since Wijeya Newspapers Limited  owned by his family led by you which is the dominant print media entity in the country will have access to information from competing media entities which include state controlled ‘Lake House’.

Your son’s justification in Parliament for Hulugalle’s appointment is both facile and laughable. It is also unbecoming of a person of his position. He inter alia stated that although he was aware that Hulugalle was a director of PTL, he went ahead with the appointment as a mark of gratitude to H.A.J. Hulugalle (his grandfather) who was a close friend and colleague of Ruwan’s grandfather D.R. Wijewardene during the early days of ‘Lake House’.

Conflict of Interest

The reason why I am writing to you on this issue is because due to an apparent ‘conflict of interest’your ‘Daily Mirror’ has evidently ‘downplayed’ the reporting of this ill advised appointment. For example, the ‘Daily Mirror’ of 25 March has positioned its report of this appointment inconspicuously on Page 6. This is the same ‘Daily Mirror’ that on 21 March 2019 gave Page 1 coverage to a story titled ‘HE BIT AN SI TO GET AWAY BUT LEFT SANS HIS PANTS’!

This is not all. The report of the appointment of Hulugalle is mysteriously missing in the online edition of ‘Daily Mirror’. I brought this to the attention of your editor Kesara Abeywardena yesterday itself. Here again the ‘Daily Mirror’ online edition is still carrying the (nationally crucial news item!) ‘Deceased mother had partaken of fried fish on alms giving day’!

Conclusion

You are the immediate Past Chairman of the Sri Lanka Press Institute (SLPI) and Press Complaints Commission of Sri Lanka (PCCSL). I dare say both the SLPI and PCCSL is dominated by your DOMINANT media company Wijeya Newspapers Limited of which you are Chairman. To top it all your son Ruwan Wijewardene is Minister of Mass Media in a government where his first cousinRanil Wickremesinghe is Prime Minister.

It is indeed strange there has been no outrage to your son’s appointment as Minister of Mass Media from the COMPETITIVE media. Are they overawed by you and your dominant media company? Sri Lanka is indeed ‘A land like no other’!

Read More

Time to rethink International Human Rights approaches

By Laksiri Fernando-April 1, 2019, 

Seventy years is a long time since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) by the UN in December 1948. Whatever the marginal biases or weaknesses that it entails, it is a fair statement on human rights that all human beings should have, irrespective of the country, culture, religion, ethnicity, class, social status, gender or any other distinction. Its rationality springs from the human rights commitments outlined in the UN Charter (1945).

The important premise that the human rights promoters have to understand however is the fact that the world is so diverse, social, political, economic and cultural conditions are different, so the development of human rights would be a difficult task that requires objectivity, patience, dialogue and multiple approaches. It is not clear whether this is understood properly then or today.

After the Universal Declaration in 1948, the UN adopted more binding two International Covenants in 1966 that became operational for those countries who ratified them since 1976. Those are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

With the adoption of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW, 1979) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC, 1989), the international framework for human rights promotion appeared complete with other declarations and conventions.

Need for Social Approaches

Among all the conventions, the Rights of the Child could be considered most futuristic. If implemented properly, with necessary skills and values in education for children (i.e. social rights), and with gainful employment when they grow up (i.e. economic rights), within a few decades human rights situation could be dramatically changed or improved. What is primarily required for such a change and improvement is socio-economic reforms.

It is believed that those children who are abused or deprived of rights are most prone to violate the other people’s rights when they grow up. This is apart from legal, institutional and political conditions that propel or perpetuate human rights violations. A major predicament, however, in this respect is that those who are supposed to implement Child Rights are the old and abusive generations. Apart from the responsible officials, they are the fathers, mothers, teachers, religious preachers, and the neighbours. Therefore, the approaches have to be more nuanced and socially oriented.

Women, without sparing men of the responsibility, undoubtedly can be mobilized in this venture. The Rights of Women and the protection of them could play a crucial role in this respect. Women and mothers can be the champions of the futuristic Child Rights. Women rights should not be limited to employment, equal wages, individual freedoms, freedom from abuse and political equality, they should be enhanced to the protection of children. This is a leadership role than a responsibility. This is one reason why women should be brought into politics (not dirty politics) and public life.

Mere Ratification?

By the end of 2018, all UN member countries (193) except the US had ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Rights of Women were ratified by 189 countries, but 50 of them with reservations on certain and some important provisions. These were due to certain religious and cultural beliefs.

In the overall context of human rights implementation, the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights can be considered crucially important. The first is important for democracy; and the second for social justice, equality and elimination of poverty. Both are interdependent, but without proper economic and social rights, no one can exercise civil, political or cultural rights properly.

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is ratified by 172 countries, with six other countries including China only signing it, hopefully with the intention of ratifying it in the future. This is fairly a good indication for future of democracy in the world. The Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is ratified by 169 countries, with four others including US only signing it.

Ratification of human rights conventions can be considered satisfactory, whatever the reservations placed on some provisions and by some countries. However the ratification is not a guarantee of implementation or adherence to human rights. This is like the proverbial difference or the gap between the ‘theory and practice’ or the ‘law and reality.’ Otherwise, the situation in the world today would have been wonderful.

Gaping Holes

No one expect any country to be perfect in practicing or implementing human rights i.e. civil rights, political rights, economic rights, social rights, cultural rights, women’s rights and child rights that we have been discussing. However, the gaps are enormous in most countries. For convenience, let us limit this discussion to five types of overall rights - civil, political, economic, social and cultural.

In liberal democratic countries where civil, political and social rights are fairly established, the economic rights are pathetically lagging behind, and in some countries major aspects of cultural and indigenous rights are also neglected. There are authoritarian countries where almost all rights are neglected or often suppressed although they have ratified most international conventions. Then there are socialist countries, China being primary, where economic and social rights are promoted or fairly established, but civil, political and cultural rights are lagging behind or still neglected. In the case of China, the size of the country, mammoth population and past history are some inhibiting factors. Social democratic countries in Northern Europe and partly Australasia appear to be the best where two sets of rights are balanced fairly well. They are rated high in the happiness index as well. However, their social democracy moves back and forth with neo-liberalism creating considerable holes.

Most alarming is the gross violations or neglect of basic human rights in so many countries around the world; many countries unfortunately being in the African continent. News and images of extreme poverty, hunger, malnutrition, armed conflicts, wars, gang violence, killings, terrorism, election violations, authoritarian or dictatorial political leaders are prominent in the media. Some may not understand these situations as related to human rights. But underlying causes are related, while obviously there are other factors involved.

Rigid Legal Approaches

All the above point to some terrible defects in human rights approaches at international as well as national levels. Simply said, the approaches are predominantly too legalistic with colossal neglect of economic and social rights.

There are so many legal experts who draft, draft and draft so many international declarations and conventions on human rights. Altogether there are over 200 international instruments (declarations, covenants, conventions, resolutions, statements etc.) today. They like to call them ‘instruments’! These are mostly in the areas of civil and political rights. After the ICESCR in 1966, there is no significant international ‘instrument’ drafted in promoting economic and social rights particularly affecting the poor and the needy.

Then there have been efforts to persuade or force particularly underdeveloped, poor and former colonial countries to ratify them without assessing their capacities to implement them. There are no proper dialogues involved. It is questionable whether these (or some of these) efforts are genuinely human rights or intentionally political (with economic interests behind). I was partly witness to what went on in Cambodia during the UN intervention (1992-93), where nearly a dozen of ‘instruments’ were forced on the country. By that time there were no more than 10 qualified lawyers in the country even to understand these ‘instruments’ properly. The compulsion to ratify ‘instruments’ has been the case in many other countries, before and after.

There has been a parallel pattern emerged where many developing countries just superficially ratified human rights ‘instruments’ to seek favours from the UN and/or Western countries. As an inducement, there were human rights conditions attached to foreign aid (and trade). Sri Lanka came under this category during JR Jayewardene’s time and thereafter. Sri Lanka’s recent sponsorship of the UNHRC Resolution 30/1 (2015) also has evolved on those lines, going into an absurd extreme. There was a time when the country even was not sure whether it has ratified the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR or not! If we take all the human rights conventions that Sri Lanka has ratified seriously, the country should in fact be a human rights paradise!

This does not mean that the ratifications of human rights conventions were wrong or unnecessary in Sri Lanka or elsewhere. The point is that those were ratified without much commitment, realism, proper planning or follow up. This is one reason why the high ratification numbers internationally of the ICCPR (172), ICESCR (169), CEDAW (189), CRC (196) or other instruments might not make much sense in practice today.

Lopsided Implementation?

There are several UN mechanisms to monitor the implementation of (1) the general commitments of human rights under the UN Charter and (2) the obligations under the ratified international conventions by member countries. The first type is called the Charter Based Bodies and the latter, Treaty Based Bodies. In whatever name they are called, the approaches seem to be going in a similar direction, the first type of bodies being more and more political and the latter type more and more legalistic.

The most controversial Charter based body today is the Human Rights Council. It oscillates between political and legalistic approaches. The US left the Council last year, after inflicting so much damage, but failing to sway the other members on the Israeli question. In my experience, the predecessor Human Rights Commission (1946-2006) was more flexible and balanced. There was no rigid bureaucracy like today, led by the Human Rights Commissioner and many so-called experts and officials. However, even during those days, the economic and social rights of the people in the world were terribly neglected.

To conclude, the main defects of human rights approaches both internationally and nationally could be identified as (1) the rigid and sterile legalism and (2) the pathetic neglect of economic and social rights of the people. Therefore, with over 200 international ‘instruments,’ the world has not progressed much since the inauguration of the Universal Declaration in 1948. This is regrettable. The most important conclusion, however, is not to throw the human rights ‘baby’ with the questionable approaches of ‘bath water.’ To save the ‘human rights baby,’ more and more social approaches are necessary with people’s involvement.

AG’s office should function independently

• AG’s Office Ordinance has been introduced during the colonial period, it is appropriate to amend it now

By Yohan Perera and Ajith Siriwardana   -2 April 2019

UNP MP Jayampathi Wickramaratne yesterday called for the amendment to the law in order to ensure that Attorney General’s office functions as an independent office. 

Speaking during the committee stage debate on the budget in Parliament, the MP said the AG’s office should be an independent institution. “The AG’s Office Ordinance has been introduced during the colonial period. It is appropriate to amend it now especially to introduce some amendments to make it bound by the law to act independently,” Dr. Wickramaratne said.  The MP said an AG is expected to make independent decisions whenever his advice is sort on certain matters. “President Maithripala Sirisena sought the advice from AG on possibility of dissolving Parliament during the political crisis popped up on October 26 last year and he declined from advising. AG should have given his independent opinion on this matter,” Dr. Wickramaratne said.  “AG is not expected to act as president’s attorney but only as an instructor.,” he added. Also he cannot act as the respondent of the government.     

Do elections matter?

President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe in Parliament

Monday, 1 April 2019


In all democracies, whether they are matured or not, periodic elections to change governments have lost their credibility and substance in the prevailing neoliberal economic world order. In this order it is global capital represented by its corporate oligarchs that actually dictates policies and sets the agenda for political parties and their leaders to implement. These parties are nothing but agents of this global oligarchy that permits them to introduce cosmetic changes with some nationalist veneer, but without structurally damaging the set neoliberal agenda.

In essence, what makes the difference between competing political parties is the way they repackage and sell it to the voting public. Thus, the choice presented to voters at elections is one of form and not substance, like choosing between Pepsi-Cola and Coca-Cola. Major parties sell the same wine in differently coloured bottles.

Given this global background Sri Lanka is about to face at least two if not three elections before the end of this year. The election virus is spreading fast starting from President Sirisena himself. Every one of his moves including his late awakening about the bond scam and drug menace is taken with an eye on the forthcoming presidential election. Whether he stands a chance to be a nominee for that office on behalf any of the major political parties is still a sixty-four thousand dollar question.



In the case of the General Election however, the two chief contenders are the UNP and SLPP. President Sirisena’s SLFP rump, a possible third, may split and join either of the other two, depending on who promises what to SLFP members. The same goes to other minor parties except perhaps JVP, which, given its revolutionary past and prolonging reluctance to come out with a manifesto, is destined to remain in the opposition at least for the time being. There is no doubt that this party has the potential to become the third alternative in the future.

The real question is, do these elections matter? The question should be split into two parts: Do they matter to the voters and do they matter to the contestants. The choice facing the Sri Lankan voter in both elections, presidential as well as parliamentary, is limited to names and labels rather than policies and programs. To concentrate on the General Election for the moment, what are the economic policies and programs that are going to improve the living conditions of the ordinary citizen offered by the two main parties?

There was a time when UNP and SLFP presented a distinctly different set of policies and approaches in respect of economic and developmental issues that confronted the country. While both parties supported a mixed economy, UNP, as it is now, was more market oriented with open invitation to foreign capital than the SLFP. The latter even formed a coalition with the left to make that difference even more distinct. That was at a time when even internationally, this difference was reflected starkly in the economic policies of not only between the two superpowers during the Cold War but also between major parties in other countries.

The situation has radically changed after the end of Cold War and collapse of economic dirigisme. Economic liberalism is the solitary economic paradigm that has gone global and Sri Lanka’s two main parties had no choice but to embrace it totally.

Given this economic congruence between the two contending parties, how differently are they going to solve at least the following problems facing the country currently? A persistent and worsening trade deficit causing currency depreciation, which alone is contributing to increase the burden of an already unbearable national debt; rising cost of living leading to increase in the incidence of poverty, household debt and even suicides; falling standards of public health and education; uncontrolled corruption and a growing market for narcotics; and callous neglect of natural environment.

Which one of the two parties has so far come out with a workable policy package to tackle these issues? None, to be precise. Why? Because, they both know very well that these issues are mostly systemic in origin and that the two parties are absolutely powerless to change the system. The country has been dragged so deep into the open economy quagmire since 1977, that what any government can do is to introduce some palliatives to ease the pain temporarily through the annual budgets, as Minister Samarawickrema has done recently. In such a situation do elections matter to an ordinary voter?

However, they matter a lot to the current and aspiring politicians. As far as common people are concerned their economic fortunes or misfortunes will continue with little change, whether it is the UNP or a UNP-led coalition, or, SLFP or SLFP headed coalition that governs over them. If there is to be some improvement in people’s living conditions that will largely be in spite and not because of Government policies. On the contrary, to the politicians in the field, victory at elections open unlimited opportunities to accumulate wealth and fortunes. To become a parliamentarian in Sri Lanka is the quickest way to amass wealth under the cover of law. How else can one explain the wealth of Sri Lankan parliamentarians, some of whom do not even possess the basic educational credential to qualify for employment in the open market? To the vast majority of them elections provide an opportunity to invest on their future.

Thus, without any meaningful economic policies to fight for or solutions to offer, and with unquenchable thirst for political power, how are these politicians going to convince voters to choose them? There will always be the ethnic and religious issues to whip up the emotions of electors. Controversies over constitutional amendments, devolution of power, status and place of Buddhism, and federalism and so on are never resolved but kept in reserve to bring them back to political platforms on the eve of elections.

This had been the running saga of Sri Lankan elections, and the forthcoming one will surely be fought on these issues. In the prevailing economic world order such issues do not impinge on the working of the order itself and therefore are tolerated.

Unfortunately, whoever wins the context, the poor voter will be the ultimate loser. How many times is he or she going to be fooled by this phantom democracy? If my memory is correct, this is the third time I am suggesting that Sri Lanka requires a technocratic cabinet with an iron fist at the helm. Periodical elections to choose policy bankrupt political parties and their leaders are not going to deliver that outcome. 

(The writer is attached to the School of Business and Governance, Murdoch University, Western Australia.)

Sri Lanka: Do Elections Matter?

Unfortunately, whoever wins the context, the poor voter will be the ultimate loser. How many times is he or she going to be fooled by this phantom democracy? 

by Dr. Ameer Ali-Monday, 1 April 2019

In all democracies, whether they are matured or not, periodic elections to change governments have lost their credibility and substance in the prevailing neoliberal economic world order. In this order it is global capital represented by its corporate oligarchs that actually dictates policies and sets the agenda for political parties and their leaders to implement. These parties are nothing but agents of this global oligarchy that permits them to introduce cosmetic changes with some nationalist veneer, but without structurally damaging the set neoliberal agenda.

In essence, what makes the difference between competing political parties is the way they repackage and sell it to the voting public. Thus, the choice presented to voters at elections is one of form and not substance, like choosing between Pepsi-Cola and Coca-Cola. Major parties sell the same wine in differently coloured bottles.

Given this global background Sri Lanka is about to face at least two if not three elections before the end of this year. The election virus is spreading fast starting from President Sirisena himself. Every one of his moves including his late awakening about the bond scam and drug menace is taken with an eye on the forthcoming presidential election. Whether he stands a chance to be a nominee for that office on behalf any of the major political parties is still a sixty-four thousand dollar question.

In the case of the General Election however, the two chief contenders are the UNP and SLPP. President Sirisena’s SLFP rump, a possible third, may split and join either of the other two, depending on who promises what to SLFP members. The same goes to other minor parties except perhaps JVP, which, given its revolutionary past and prolonging reluctance to come out with a manifesto, is destined to remain in the opposition at least for the time being. There is no doubt that this party has the potential to become the third alternative in the future.

The real question is, do these elections matter? The question should be split into two parts: Do they matter to the voters and do they matter to the contestants. The choice facing the Sri Lankan voter in both elections, presidential as well as parliamentary, is limited to names and labels rather than policies and programs. To concentrate on the General Election for the moment, what are the economic policies and programs that are going to improve the living conditions of the ordinary citizen offered by the two main parties?

There was a time when UNP and SLFP presented a distinctly different set of policies and approaches in respect of economic and developmental issues that confronted the country. While both parties supported a mixed economy, UNP, as it is now, was more market oriented with open invitation to foreign capital than the SLFP. The latter even formed a coalition with the left to make that difference even more distinct. That was at a time when even internationally, this difference was reflected starkly in the economic policies of not only between the two superpowers during the Cold War but also between major parties in other countries.

The situation has radically changed after the end of Cold War and collapse of economic dirigisme. Economic liberalism is the solitary economic paradigm that has gone global and Sri Lanka’s two main parties had no choice but to embrace it totally.

Given this economic congruence between the two contending parties, how differently are they going to solve at least the following problems facing the country currently? A persistent and worsening trade deficit causing currency depreciation, which alone is contributing to increase the burden of an already unbearable national debt; rising cost of living leading to increase in the incidence of poverty, household debt and even suicides; falling standards of public health and education; uncontrolled corruption and a growing market for narcotics; and callous neglect of natural environment.

Which one of the two parties has so far come out with a workable policy package to tackle these issues? None, to be precise. Why? Because, they both know very well that these issues are mostly systemic in origin and that the two parties are absolutely powerless to change the system. The country has been dragged so deep into the open economy quagmire since 1977, that what any government can do is to introduce some palliatives to ease the pain temporarily through the annual budgets, as Minister Samarawickrema has done recently. In such a situation do elections matter to an ordinary voter?

However, they matter a lot to the current and aspiring politicians. As far as common people are concerned their economic fortunes or misfortunes will continue with little change, whether it is the UNP or a UNP-led coalition, or, SLFP or SLFP headed coalition that governs over them. If there is to be some improvement in people’s living conditions that will largely be in spite and not because of Government policies. On the contrary, to the politicians in the field, victory at elections open unlimited opportunities to accumulate wealth and fortunes. To become a parliamentarian in Sri Lanka is the quickest way to amass wealth under the cover of law. How else can one explain the wealth of Sri Lankan parliamentarians, some of whom do not even possess the basic educational credential to qualify for employment in the open market? To the vast majority of them elections provide an opportunity to invest on their future.

Thus, without any meaningful economic policies to fight for or solutions to offer, and with unquenchable thirst for political power, how are these politicians going to convince voters to choose them? There will always be the ethnic and religious issues to whip up the emotions of electors. Controversies over constitutional amendments, devolution of power, status and place of Buddhism, and federalism and so on are never resolved but kept in reserve to bring them back to political platforms on the eve of elections.

This had been the running saga of Sri Lankan elections, and the forthcoming one will surely be fought on these issues. In the prevailing economic world order such issues do not impinge on the working of the order itself and therefore are tolerated.

Unfortunately, whoever wins the context, the poor voter will be the ultimate loser. How many times is he or she going to be fooled by this phantom democracy? If my memory is correct, this is the third time I am suggesting that Sri Lanka requires a technocratic cabinet with an iron fist at the helm. Periodical elections to choose policy bankrupt political parties and their leaders are not going to deliver that outcome.

(The writer is attached to the School of Business and Governance, Murdoch University, Western Australia.)

To defend Democracy, a broad conversation among all Democrats needed

BY JAYADEVA UYANGODA-31 March, 2019


In democracies, elections usually are significant political turning points. In democratic theory, an election marks two key opportunities to the people as well as the rulers. For the people, it marks the periodic occasion to elect their rulers and grant them authority to rule over them for a specific period of time, usually, five years.

For the rulers, incumbent or aspiring, an election provides legitimacy to rule. Legitimacy entails both legality and popular support. Legitimacy secured at a free and fair election is an essential precondition for democratic government. The absence of legitimacy secured through elections usually erodes the authority of the rulers and eventually the State.

Sri Lanka’s citizens are awaiting two crucial elections in the year 2019, Presidential and Parliamentary. Of the two, the presidential election is destined to be most crucial for the democratic future of Sri Lanka. It has the potential to determine the country’s future political directions, nature of the Sri Lankan State as well as the state-society relations.

Impending clash

This political significance to the forthcoming presidential election emanates from a single factor. It is the slow building up of a head-on clash between two political projects, parliamentary democracy and autocratic authoritarianism.

Versions of both, democracy and authoritarianism have been present in Sri Lankan politics in weak forms for decades. Similarly, political power has been competitively shared by weak democratic and ‘soft’ authoritarian forces through electoral competition, coalition formation, and alliances with various social and ideological blocks. Moreover, governments themselves –whether led by the SLFP or the UNP-- have been varied mixtures of weak democracy and soft-authoritarianism.

The story of Sri Lankan democracy’s survival, resilience, and continuity is also interspersed with aborted attempts to enthrone populist and hard authoritarian regimes under the so-called strong rulers. The Rajapaksa administration after 2009 was the last such regime. The constitutional coup of October 26, 2019 was the most recent attempt by a hard authoritarian alliance first to capture the Constitution and then the State.

Sri Lanka’s uneasy and tension-ridden co-existence between weak democracy and soft authoritarianism seems to be now facing a moment of transition. It is not because the democracy project has acquired new strength and vitality, but because the authoritarian project has entered a phase of a harder version of it under the leadership of a former military office who has also served as the country’s Defence Secretary during the last phase of the civil war.

The hard authoritarian project is being backed by a new coalition of political, social and economic forces that see democracy, freedom and human rights as outdated and irrelevant political liabilities that need to be abandoned, and abandoned forthwith. This coalition is preparing for the Presidential election to seek a popular mandate for their immediate goal of capturing political power through democratic means.

The media speculation that Sri Lanka People’s Party (SLPP) is likely to field Gotabaya Rajapaksa as its Presidential candidate has provided a new impetus to the clash between democracy and authoritarianism in Sri Lanka’s current politics. If the SLPP, currently led by two Rajapaksa brothers -- Mahinda and Basil -- endorses Gotabaya as its candidate, the Presidential election campaign will certainly be one marked by a clear polarization among political forces.

Gotabaya’s ideology

There are two significant features of Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s new political ideology, which he propagates with a great deal of conviction through spoken and written word.

The first is the claim that the country needs a strong ruler and an equally strong government to ensure political and economic stability and development in place of weak and vacillating ‘liberal’ leaders and governments. This indeed has been a subterfuge resorted to by most autocratic rulers and dictators to capture state power.

The second is the assertion that Sri Lanka does not need democracy, individual freedom, or human rights. Gotabaya Rajapaksa preaches that liberalism which sustains these normative fundamentals have become anachronistic to today’s world and unsuitable to Sri Lankan people.

The world has seen this twin argument advanced in many Latin American, African and Asian countries since the late 1950s. It was an argument that had an appeal at that time among sections of the military, bureaucratic and business elites of many developing countries. In Asia, several countries such as Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Burma, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea and later Bangladesh followed this path. More recently, business and political elites in the Maldives returned to this option after a brief democratic interlude. However, with disastrous consequences of these developmental hard authoritarian experiments, and their excessive political and social costs, its lure disappeared. Except in Singapore, all authoritarian regimes have been replaced by democratic regimes. Only in Thailand, the military has returned to power, after popular protests against a corrupt democratic regime.

Weak Democracies still better

Thus, compared with hard authoritarian ‘strong’ governments and ‘strong’ rulers, weak democratic regimes are more the rule than the exception in Asia and elsewhere. Weak democratic regimes are weak due to a variety of reasons. The ideological commitment to thin versions of political liberalism, enmeshing of electoral politics with corruption, promotion of ethno-nationalist sectarian politics, weak commitment to human rights and freedoms, and the neglect of social and other inequalities are key among such reasons.

Why do people seem to prefer weak democracies to strong autocracies? The answer lies in the inherent and unique quality of democracy. Democracy is not only a form of government; rather it is also a form of human civilization, perhaps the only form that values and celebrates human freedom, equality, diversity, and dignity. As a political doctrine, it is the only one that promises, and often succeeds, though not always perfectly, in that promise that all citizens are equal and entitled to equality, without any form of discrimination based on gender, class, ethnicity, religious belief or disability. In contexts where these rights and equalities are denied, governments committed to norms, values and promises of democracy allow citizens to dissent, protest, demand, and mobilize themselves to secure them, without facing State violence.

As a form of government, it is the only one that offers a paradigm of empowered and equal citizenship in which the citizens as voters have an inalienable right to elect their rulers, authorizes them to rule, freely criticize the rulers when they go wrong, replace them when they continue to go wrong, and thereafter continue to live in freedom without facing the risk of being arbitrarily arrested, tortured or disappeared in vans, white or black.

That is why imperfect democracies are still worth protecting against their illiberal, undemocratic alternatives.

Popular imagination

The voters and the democratic forces of the Maldives, our small neighbour, are the latest to show the world that democracy is a political goal worth fighting for, without letting a powerful coalition of autocratic business, political and bureaucratic elites to capture their political imagination.

In the run up to the coming Presidential election, the battle lines are already drawn. The encounter is most likely to be in the form of a clash between democracy and autocracy to capture the political imagination of the masses. It has already taken a clear ideological turn, with Gotabaya Rajapaksa spelling out his authoritarian project as an anti-liberal democratic crusade.

This is why Sri Lanka’s democratic forces, organized in and outside political parties, cannot take the next Presidential election for granted. It is a crucial political moment that will decide the democratic political fate of its citizens. Despite their individual party or organizational agendas, they would all have to work together to prevent the political imagination of the masses to be captured by the new coalition of hard-authoritarian, autocratic forces. Thus, the election campaign will be a huge ideological battle as well.

Therefore, Sri Lanka’s weak democrats too have to become hard democrats to face the onslaught by hard authoritarians.

Only a broad coalition of all democrats, hard or weak, can prevent the hard autocrats from capturing the popular political imagination, and then the State, sometime during this year.

Conversation

The exact nature and dynamics of such a broad democratic coalition is not yet clear. Only a sustained conversation will help us to have any clarity about them. In other words, it has to begin as a coalition of ideas among democrats, given the fragmented nature of Sri Lanka’s political society.

At present, one can develop only some preliminary suggestions merely to generate thinking and reflection.

For example, this broad coalition may ideally be a lose alliance that promotes a conversation with the democratic elements within all political parties, blocs and movements– the UNP and UNF, the SLFP and the UPFA, SLPP, JVP, TNA and other Tami parties, SLMC and other Muslim parties, the Left parties and groups, civil society movements and groups, and individual citizens.

The main task ahead for these democratic elements in conversation may well be to launch, individually or in blocs, an ideological and programmatic struggle for protecting democracy against emerging hard authoritarianism.

If they are parties, they will advance democratic reform agendas that are designed to re-strengthen the legitimacy of democracy and in turn sustain, not undermine, the democracy discourse in the country.

This they can do while pursuing their own agendas at the Presidential and Parliamentary elections. If they are civil society groups and individual activists, they can work with all or any organization involved in the struggle to prevent the surge of hard authoritarianism.

Reinventing and re-launching the democracy conservation across party and group loyalties is the need of the hour. Once the conversation gets stabilized and sustained, its political outcomes may also appear in the horizon, sooner than later. 

On Dogs

Sanjana Hattotuwa-March 30, 2019, 5:13 pm 

"The better I get to know men, the more I find myself loving dogs."
– Charles De Gaulle

Ricky was my replacement, I think. At least when I was away in Delhi, during my undergraduate years. He was cross between a South African Ridgeback and stupid. I first met him just over a year old, when after a long journey back home, he proceeded to pee all over me. We put it down to excitement and the license given to a puppy to make a mess of everything, and yet be loved all the more for it. Over the next three years, my encounters with Ricky were for a month or two at most, every year. Each time I saw him he had grown, in size and general disobedience.

My parents had a cat when I was much smaller. It watched TV with us. Ambling along once a teledrama had started, it sat far too close to the TV to really see anything but proceeded to look left and right. What grabbed its attention remains a topic of conversation in the family to this day. That’s what pets do. They are an endless source of stories, laughter and laments. The cat died when I was too small to feel any sadness. I am told it is buried somewhere in the garden. The family maintains it was killed by an incompetent vet. The vet’s erstwhile house is still cursed silently when passed.

I am not entirely convinced, but never get in the way of its re-telling. Ricky I remember and am scarred by. For no discernible reason, the day after I had come back from surgery to remove my appendix, Ricky bit my hand, arm and leg. In that order. He was a strong dog, whose bark I discovered was as bad as his bite. A tooth of his missed a major vein by sheer luck. So in addition to an abdomen that felt like a bus had run over it, I was for the next several days like an Egyptian mummy – bandaged literally from hand to heel.

Not that Ricky cared. Knowing, partially and sporadically, he had done something that made the humans who fed him angry and sad, the dog tried to make amends by, first, looking sheepish and when that failed, moping. Eventually, this worked. Ricky never bit me again, or from his perspective, I never smelt like something he felt the need to bark at or bite. My father, Ricky’s permanent legal counsel, put it down the foreign smells from a hospital that set him off. My mother, who made the cardinal mistake of once feeding the mutt by hand when it was sick, had to then for the rest of the years he lived, feed him by hand.

This involved lovingly rolling small balls of rice, running behind Ricky in the back garden, prying open his mouth and shoving food down his throat. Just as I wasn’t there for his arrival, I wasn’t there for his passing. Unlike the cat before, I was glad I wasn’t. I can’t recall much from the time I did my Masters, nearly 15 years ago. I do recall the news that Ricky had died, and what I felt like for days after.

It’s been an absolutely crushing, long week, and for some reason, I have thought of the dogs in my life. In the mid-90s, when my sister’s father-in-law passed away suddenly, I recall the family dog who didn’t move from under the casket, until it was lifted. And then, it looked profoundly lost. Often in foreign countries, my encounters with dogs have been far more varied than ever violent. It goes against every fibre of my being to not get on all fours and pet sniffer dogs at airports. In Kabul, the sniffer dogs looked happier and better fed than their handlers. In Davos, the only St. Bernard I’ve seen, briefly, was in a park and on top of me. Second before, I had been immersed in a book under a tree. Again, I do not know what the dog saw me as, but the horrified owner with leash in hand was perhaps even more confused when I invited a second attack. This I almost immediately and very deeply regretted, because the dog, having in its mind put me down as entirely daft, proceeding to jump on me at full chat. Lomu, if alive, would have met his match.

In Brooklyn and Berlin, where dogs are welcome in restaurants, pubs and supermarkets, I’ve encountered dogs who have been better behaved than most children. In Nairobi, the plump, pitch black and deep brown Labradors of my hotel’s owner ritually greeted guests and accompanied them to their rooms, which in my case was a tree-house of sorts with a steep staircase. I found it hard to ascend, but the dogs, familiar with the steps and impatient with struggling guests, pushed their way through, sniffed around and then left after a thorough, vigorous petting which was demanded. This was repeated every morning, and I suspect, in all the rooms.

My son’s love of dogs is anchored to one household. There is story recounted and I suspect even a photo,of when he was around five, a deep, hushed conversation with Chloe – one of their dogs – under the kitchen table. My son hadn’t learnt to distinguish between dogs and humans, perceiving or treating one as he would the other. Chloe, for her part, had been entirely attentive and very patient with the small, talkative human. I recall when Chloe died, but my son was too young to comprehend.

But when Trinnie – an angelic Alsatian in the same household - passed away last year, both he and I were completely devastated, for days. We used to spend weekends with her dogs and three others, washing and brushing, feeding or being chased and eaten. The character, mentality and traits of dogs come through close, kinetic association. Both my son and I, in just that one household, spend more time on floors and all fours, heads buried amongst a blurred mass of paws and fur, than seated and talking as humans generally do.

Another friend and her husband, both completely mad in all the right ways, have more dogs and cats at home – all rescued – than I can ever keep track off. It is never short of an epic struggle to get myself and my son out of that house, with dogs and cats who range from the really strange to the certifiably mad, co-existing miraculously. And then there’s Boomer, an ageing Labrador who clearly came upon a single-digit age he liked and mentally stuck to it, resulting in behaviour associated with a puppy from a large, fat, uncoordinated, mad mastiff. Unsurprisingly, he made fast and firm friends with my son.

Perhaps because some of my best memories are around or with them,death often makes me think of dogs. The grief I feel when someone close dies is entirely indistinguishable from the profound
sadness I’ve felt after a dog I’ve known and loved has passed away. I have been followed by beautiful stray dogs, bitten by my own dog, pounced on by random dogs, humped on by friends’ dogs,
known many mad dogs and loved truly strange dogs who I strongly suspect may never have known they were what they were. I’ve cried so much after watching ‘Marley and Me’ on a flight, that the stewardess, visibly distressed, asked me if I was returning because of a sudden death in the family.

So much of what dogs are, I wish more humans were and possessed. Their short lives give meaning to our longer, and sometimes more pointless ones. I may be in a small minority of people who believe
that to be compared to a dog is high praise, and a rare compliment. Trying to make sense of the sudden death this week, I recalled Pamuk’s line from one of his better novels, on how dogs speak, but
only to those who know how to listen. Perhaps the best amongst us, are dogs in disguise. I would be perfectly fine with that.

Wilpattu, Islamophobia

• Bodu Bala sena and other ultra- nationalist fringe groups launched a campaign, alleging that the Wilpattu forest was being cleared to resettle the returning Muslim families

2 April 2019 12:18 am

The anti-Muslim campaign of the fringe Sinhala Buddhist ultra-nationalist bigotry is regenerative. It is adept at finding a new ruse every now and then. The list ranges from Halal, cow slaughter, Muslim clothing stores, wada pethi (sterilizing tablets) and the latest ‘Save Wilpattu.’   

All the past campaigns culminated in a violent upheaval, after which it went through a period of hibernation only to resurface under a new set of affected grievances. 

The latest is ostensibly to protect the forestry of Wilpattu, but it is the same old Islamophobic campaign that has resurfaced after a lull of several months following the violent clashes in Digana and Amparai.

If the quiet on the ultra-nationalist front was mainly due to the police action and arrest of several key functionaries of Mahason Balakaya, a bigoted Sinhalese Buddhist fringe group, their latest activism comes after the court released those suspects from the remand prison.   

Like the previous episodes of anti- Muslim bigotry, the latest campaign is promoted through the social media, through a number of facebook pages, twitter accounts and other social media pages. Some of the pictures of purported Wilpattu deforestation are in fact photos of land cleared for palm oil cultivation in Indonesia and Brazil, as BBC Sinhala website revealed recently. However, these photos are shared and retweeted in hundreds, some times in thousands, effectively creating mass circulation of a racially motivated fake narrative.  

The language is often unabashedly racist and anti- Muslim. If the recent history is any guide, ramification of the on-line hate campaign will soon be felt in real life. State security agencies should monitor these groups and make arrests before it is too late.  

Wilpattu is a complex problem where the right to return of the Muslim families who were chased away by the LTTE in 1990 is confronted by a new found, ( and somewhat feigned) concerns of environment protection. At the end of the war, families uprooted by the LTTE returned to a thick forestry that had overgrown in their original land. In 2012, a Presidential task force headed by then Minister Basil Rajapaksa recommended that the department of forest conversation release land for the resettlement of these displaced families. Each family received a half an acre for a house and an another acre of land for cultivation.

However as the resettlement was underway, Bodu Bala sena and other ultra- nationalist fringe groups launched a campaign, alleging that the Wilpattu forest was being cleared to resettle the returning Muslim families. Minister Rishard Bathurdeen who spearheaded the program that was partly funded by the Qatar Foundation was accused of clearing the forest and resettling his constituents.  

Confronted with these allegations, then forest minister Anura Priya Darshana Yapa extended the buffer of the Wilpattu forest reserve. Subsequently in 2017, President Maithripala Sirisena issued a gazette notification, declaring Mavillu, Weppal, Karadikkuli, Marichchikadi and Vilaththikulam forests as the forest reserve of Mawillu under the 3A of the Forest Conservation Ordinance.

Given the divergent stakeholders and competing narratives, the government should provide a degree of clarity on the situation. It is also important to take into context the humanitarian concerns of the families who are being robbed of their original land due to the extension of forest buffer. Last week, an uproar erupted in Parliament when some opposition MPs alleged of deforestation of Wilpattu. Speaker Karu Jayasuriya has announced that he will subject the report to an evaluation by a Parliament committee. The government has also agreed to a Parliament debate on the subject.  

Islamophobia in the current campaign against Wilpattu resettlement should be identified and treated as such. Propagators of anti-Muslim hate in real life and in virtual life should be identified, monitored and arrested. New laws should be incorporated under the proposed counter terrorism laws to enable preventive detention of bigots for a substantial period.  
However, it is also important to dissect the role of increasing Islamization within the Muslim community, which in effect ignites islamophobia, and uncertainty within the other communities, even among those who are otherwise, live and let live type of folks.   

Creeping Islamization of Sri Lankan Muslims is all the more evident in certain pre-dominantly Muslim enclaves in the East and Puttalam. Lured by Gulf money, and an alien doctrinaire ideology, local Muslims in those areas are undergoing an Arabianization of their social, cultural and religious lives. A more generalizable but self- evident manifestation of this Arabization of local Muslims is the increasing number of Muslim women who wear Burka, the all- encompassing Islamic garment and Niqab, the face veil. There were handful, if any, who wore those clothing in Sri Lanka before the 9/11 and subsequent spread on Salafi Islam.  

The self- interested advocacy of right to wear these garments are in vein as long as they ignore their right to not to wear the same.   

Mushrooming maddrasas where Muslim youth are taught an austere version of Salafi Islam against moderate local Islam are also purveyors of Islamization. Increasing number of local youth attend these religious schools funded by the oil money from the Gulf states and their religious organizations.  

Rather than mediating to sooth the pervasive influence of the foreign Islam, so called Muslim religious organizations such as Thawhed Jamath, tend to serve as accessories of Arabization of local Muslims. Muslim elders have withstood the calls by Muslim women to revamp the Muslim marriage law.  

Mainstream political leaders who rely on Muslim votes for their reelection are not willing to question this unfolding Islamization. But, if the recent history of Europe is any lesson, there will be a time that everyone would regret for not raising alarm beforehand.   

Among the few groups who raise their voice is Sinhala ultra-nationalists. They are emboldened and to a certain extent, is vindicated by the on-going self- alienation of some quarters of local Muslims from the mainstream. 

As much as it should confront islamophobia, Sri Lanka should act now to reverse the on-going Islamization of its Muslims. Both objectives should be approached simultaneously.   

In Search Of “Few Good Men”

By Vishnu Gupta –MARCH 31, 2019

W. Vishnu Gupta

Time has come to look for “few good men” devoid of venal and vile traits to lead us and free us from the clutches of oligarchs leading crony capitalism and crony socialism in our country. Contrary to the popular reports in the public domain every politician in the parliament of Sri Lanka is vile and venal. There may be a few MPs without venal traits, yet they have compromised the national interests and sullied the principles of democracy on many occasions in order to protect vested interests of the corrupt political parties or political friends. There isn’t a single exception. Therefore it is imperative to the voters that they search for few good men to represent them in the parliament and a virtuous, honest, intelligent visionary as the executive president. None of the names circulating in the media as the possible candidates fit into the noble classification of “Few Good Men”.

Judging by the deeds (Kharma) of these leading guys in the past and not from their words, it is doubtful that any of them will belong to a “Good Men” club even in their next births. Then, the natural question is do we want to participate in a negative kharma in promoting these alleged well documented sinners of our nation. The answer must be a resounding “NO”.

Stealing from Begging Bowl

It is interesting to note that these aspirants of next presidency did not know that their venal traits and the enormous appetite for stealing from the Public Purse. Stealing from “Public Purse” or “Treasury” is equivalent to that of stealing from the Begging Bowl of Lord Buddha. Yes, Sri Lankan politicians have stooped so low to steal from the begging bowl of Lord Buddha committing unpardonable sins. The Hindu, Christian and Islamic doctrines also may not see the final verdict on stealing from treasury (public purse) differently. Crony Capitalism and Crony Socialism have sheltered them from justice in this life but there is no escape for them in the next birth. Hence the voters of Sri Lanka should not be forced to choose from a pack of sinners. The Sri Lankan voters must understand their actions. It must be explained according to tenets of Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity and Islam. It is a great sin to aid and abet the sinners of cardinal crimes committed against many generations of our innocent children. Ignorance is not an excuse or an escape valve.

Finding a group of “Few Good Men” should not be a difficult task for the voters of a country where literacy rate is 92% and many of them are brought up by parents adhering to religious convictions. Let’s look at criteria to identify the “Good Men” with acceptable traits specified by different religions in the country.

How to appraise a Good Man

Measure for Buddhists

For the Buddhists it must be pretty obvious, a good virtuous and intelligent man will observe “Pancha Seela or the Five Precepts in his daily life:

Five Precepts:

A good Buddhist man or woman must undertake to observe the following rules:

1. To abstain from taking life – “taking life” means to murder anything that lives. It refers to the striking and killing of living beings.

2)  To abstain from taking what is not given -“To take what is not given” means the appropriation of what is not given. It refers to the removing of someone else’s property, to the stealing of it, to theft. “What is not given” means that which belongs to someone else.

3) To abstain from sensuous misconduct – “Sensuous misconduct” – here “sensuous” means “sexual” and “misconduct” is extremely blameworthy bad behavior. “Sensuous misconduct” is the will to transgress against those whom one should not go into, and the carrying out of this intention by unlawful physical action

4)  To abstain from false speech – “False speech” is the will to deceive others by words or deeds. One can also explain: “False” means something which is not real, not true. “Speech” is the intimation that that is real or true. “False speech” is then the volition which leads to the deliberate intimation to someone else that something is so when it is not so.

5)  To abstain from intoxicants as tending to cloud the mind – Refrain from taking intoxicants that cloud the mind and cause heedlessness. This means drugs and alcohol (but not prescription medication). This precept is a traditional way of detoxifying our bodies and minds.

Moreover a good Buddhist follows noble teachings (Dharma) of Lord Buddha. And take refuge in the Triple Gem; the Buddha, the fully enlightened one the Dharma, the teachings expounded by the Buddha the Sangha, the monastic order of Buddhism that practice the Dharma.

A good man does not have to visit the temple of the sacred tooth relic in Kandy every week or every month. Or visit a Buddhist temple every day. If this “Good Man” aspires to be a political leader or a ruler of the nation he should know “Dasa Raaja Dharma” or the “Ten Royal Virtues”; know it well, understand the meanings, extensions and the interpretation consistent with the contemporary environment completely.

The ‘Ten Royal Virtues’

Read More