Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Saturday, February 17, 2018

What do Sri Lanka’s local elections mean for the future of democracy?



SRI LANKA’S recent local elections saw both the incumbent National Unity Government and main opposition party, the Tamil National Alliance (TNA), suffer serious setbacks.

Both Leaders Should Not Fail The People & The Country

Veluppillai Thangavelu
logoSri Lanka’s politics is in a state of turmoil following the Local government Authorities (LGA) elections held island-wide on February 10, 2018. The last election to Local Authorities was held in 2011 on a staggered basis. Nominations were called for 93 local authorities (7 MC, 18 UC, 68 DC) 11 and 14 December 2017. A total of 523 nominations (466 form registered political parties, 57 from independent groups) were received of which 500 were accepted (447 form registered political parties, 53 from independent groups) and 23 rejected (19 form registered political parties, 4 from independent groups).
The total number of members in local government has been increased from 4,486 to around 8,356 members. According to Section 27F of the Amendment, 25 percent of the total number of members in each local authority has to be women. This does not mean that 25 percent of the elected members of every party must be women. This is an overall percentage for the LG body. Elections have to be held for Local Government Authorities (LGA) on same day.
Nominations to the remaining 248 local authorities (17 MC, 23 UC, and 208 DC) took place between 18 and 21 December 2017. A total of 1,582 nominations (1,399 form registered political parties, 183 from independent groups) were received of which 1,553 were accepted (1,379 form registered political parties, 174 from independent groups) and 29 rejected (20 form registered political parties, 9 from independent groups).
On 18 December 2017 the Election Commission announced that elections to all 341 local authorities would be held on 10 February 2018. Around 13,000 polling stations were used. The election will cost around Rs. 4 billion and needed 300,000 staff, including 65.000 Police personnel. On 30 January 2018 the Supreme Court issued an injunction preventing election in Elpitiya DC following a petition by the Democratic United National Front against the rejection of their nomination list.
The elections held for 340 Local Authorities have resulted in over 180 LGAs having hung councils with no party winning a clear majority. This is largely due to the change in electing members under Proportional Representation (PR) to the new Mixed Electoral System (MES).
The Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (SLPP) was able to secure victory in 239 Local Governments, followed by the United National Party (UNP) with 41, Tamil National Alliance with 34 and the United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) and the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) jointly securing 10.
Election to LGAs  is based on a 60%  FPTP plus 40%  on  PR system,  For example the Jaffna Municipal Council (JMC)  has  45 seats out of which  27 seats (60%) will be elected  on FPTP and 18 seats (40%) on PR. The elections resulted in ITAK winning 14 out of 27 seats ward-wise. The percentage of votes polled by ITAK is 35.76% and, therefore, it is entitled to 16 seats. Under the FPTP the ITAK/TNA won in 14 wards out of 27 wards. Therefore, it will be allocated 2 more seats (16-14) taking the total to 16.What if ITAK won 17 wards out of 27 wards. It will be allowed to keep the 17 seats, but no seats from the PR list. This system favours small parties at the expense of bigger parties. For example, ACTC won 9 wards out of 27 and polled 29.8% of the total votes and, therefore. entitled to 13 seats. Since it won only 9 wards on FPTP it is entitled to another 4 on the PR making the total 13 members. So under the present system a party that wins more seats on the FPTP will get lesser or no seats at all under the PR list! For example, a Party that comes fourth with 10% of the total vote but no elected seats may get as many as 3, 4 or even 5 seats under the new system!   Here is the Table 1 showing results of the JMC at the 2018 election.
It will be observed that under MES the party with more seats under FPTP is penalised, the ITAK getting only 2 seats while the ACTC bags 4 seats under PR. The SLFP with just 1,479 votes gets 2 seats under the PR. Under the old PR system ITAK would have got two more bonus seats. This weighted representation to smaller parties will encourage many to contest elections as independents. It is, therefore, necessary to have a second look at the present system before elections are held for Provincial Elections to avoid hung councils.

Former crimes OIC, Senior DIG to turn state witnesses

Former Mt. Lavinia Police Crimes OIC, SI Tissa Sugathapala and retired Senior DIG Prasanna Nanayakkara arrested by the CID over the killing of veteran journalist Lasantha Wickrematunge have agreed to testify as state witnesses, the CID said.
Kalubowila JMO Dr. Sunil Kumara who issued Lasantha’s autopsy report stated that the cause of death was due to cranio cerebral injuries following a discharge of a firearm. However, the reports of the Government Analyst and Prof. Mohan Silva who performed an emergency operation on Wickrematunge soon after his admission to the Kalubowila hospital, had stated that there was no trace of any gunshot injuries.
According to the CID, the telephone details of former Kalubowila JMO indicates that he was in touch with former senior DIG Prasanna Nanayakkara, adding that Dr. Sunil Kumara is also a relative of DIG Nanayakkara.
SI Tissa Sugathapala was taken into custody by the CID on February 2 and retired Senior DIG Prasanna Nanayakkara was arrested on February 13.
A CID source told the Daily News that they are currently trying to determine what information contained in the note book kept by Wickrematunge. He said they had obtained court approval to subject this note book to handwriting tests by the Examiner of Questioned Documents (EQD). Several pages of Wickramatunge’s note book had been removed and replaced, the CID said.
The CID said the Examiner of Questioned Documents will be able to determine if the handwriting on the replaced pages tallies with the rest of the handwriting on the note book.
The former DIG is facing charges of aiding and abetting in destroying vital evidence in the investigations into the killing of Wickrematunge. The former Mount Lavinia Crimes OIC had also admitted that he had acted to conceal the evidence of the killing based on the instructions of senior officials of the police.
Many files similar to those that were reported missing in the investigations related to the murder of Wickramatunge and several forged documents had been discovered hidden in the house of the former Crimes OIC, which was found when CI Sugathapala’s house was searched.
Information had also been revealed that Lasantha’s diary which had been found in his car at the time of his assassination, containing all his details, his mobile phone and several other items had been given by SI Sugathapala to an SP who had then given it to the DIG and then to the IG and eventually to the high ranking government official. This information had also come to light during the interrogation of SI Sugathapala.
Lasantha Wickrematunge was killed by two assailants who had followed him on a motorcycle at Attidiya on January 8, 2009. But investigations remained stagnant with no promising progress for around nine years.
However, the present government recommenced investigations under the CID and evidence pertaining to this crime has been surfacing gradually.

Prez & PM crucified for sheltering crooks

Democrats, anti-fascists and national minorities regroup!


article_image



"Ho hoo! I got you well and truly by the short and curlies!"

"Tell him to push-off"

Kumar David- 

Mahinda Rajapaksa and his poroppaya scored a significant victory and the yahapalana parties suffered defeat. The electorate reverted to January 2015. By ‘reverted’ I mean, the Feb 2018 statistics are like January rather than August 2015. In Jan. MR polled 47.6% of the national vote. He drew a small Muslim, Upcountry Tamil and Sinhala Catholic vote, say 4%, and therefore a core 44% was Sinhala-Buddhist (SB). This implies that about 63% of the nation’s SB population threw in their lot with him. This time poroppaya polled 44.7%, nearly all SB, same as MR’s SB vote in Jan 2015.

Those, like this correspondent, who wanted racism defeated and the crooked punished are appalled - though in my inner circle I was the only lonely soul who voiced a possible poroppaya win. MR gained for two reasons; one objective and the other related to the stupidity of leaders. Sinhala Buddhism as an ideology has a grip on the mass mind, an objective fact. The subjective: Everyone, including yours faithfully, believes that President Sirisena and PM Ranil are shielding crooks, killers and bribe-takers of the previous regime, as well as corrupt yahapalana politicos. I mean it literally when I say, I have not met a single person who disagrees. Some blame either the President or the PM more, others explain that it is difficult to do otherwise, but all agree that it is happening.

The hegemony of SB ideology

The much-loved man in the street reverses my priority; he holds that the subjective factor, shielding criminals (or having links to crooks – Bond Scam, MS’s siblings and progeny) enraged the public. Hordes of UNP voters abstained while poroppaya people turned out in numbers. The former were disillusioned, the latter determined. But this is the shadow. To see the real pith and marrow of SB-substance read the voting numbers in SB dominated Pradeshiya Sabhas. I have stacks of results before me – Ambalantota, Rajangana, Padiyathalawa, Karandeniya, Bible and it goes on). Poroppya polled 50-65% to the UNP’s 25-30% in the SB heartland. And suburban petty-bourgeois cultural hubs like Maharagama, Kalutara, Horana, Galle, Matara and Gampaha responded to hela jathika abimane.

The writing is on the wall: This is Sinhala Buddhist land, culturally unprepared to modernise or enter an economic nexus with the outside world. Devolution and liberal notions of holding Tamils and Muslims in fraternal embrace is emotionally alien. The Ranil-Malik-Mangala economic project, in the form articulated, is in shreds. Though there was hope after the defeat of Rajapaksa presidency and parliament that SB hegemony of ideology and state would recede, the hope has turned sour. True, state racism is muted – military oppression in N & E and state hostility to minorities has receded – but the perceptions of the petty-bourgeoisie mass is still primitive.

Readers will observe I am emphasising the racial dimension and Pres and PM inaction on criminality more than economic concerns. I stated in my 4 Feb column that livelihood issues would have less effect on the electoral outcome than these. The results confirm that if cost-of-living was a burning issue urban centres would have gravitated more heavily against the UNP. But the UNP won Kalutara MC Hambantota MC, Badulla MC, Kollonawa UC, Galle MC (surprise, surprise) and a spate of other urban centres in addition to Colombo, Kandy, Dehiwala and Nuwara Eliya. If this is attributed to the swing of minority community voters, it reinforces my other argument as well.

Some UNP imbeciles want a UNP-Only government so that they can pursue their economic agenda unimpeded and "win the next election". Bollocks! The Ranil-Malik-Mangala project is not election winning populism. A UNP-Only slate can win future elections by facing a blank slate. How? Just nab and prosecute crooks; then MR will have no candidates, they will all be serving time. This is not humour, it’s a deadly serious suggestion.

The partition into urbanites, and rural farmers and suburban petty-bourgeois is a signal. While fertiliser shortage was a brief irritant, opposition to modernisation and willingness to swallow "Save Mother Lanka", "Muslims endanger our culture" and such like primitivisms are a better explanation. Every pro-poroppaya man-in-the-street I chatted up in the last week spoke of "horakang" and "rata beraaganeema". No surprise that in post-election pronouncements Rajapaksa continues to play the Eelam card and the LTTE card.

I once again assert, that a candidate without any minority support, say Gota, can obtain 42% at most in a presidential poll. This, however, is if bourgeois democracy still prevails. Ranil and Sira have squandered a brief democratic spring, whose residue is now being challenged by an ideologically racist, politically authoritarian, personally Rajapaksa led, backlash. In presidential unlike in general elections all anti-Rajapaksa voices and votes unite.

If you reckon I am overstating the case on race, I will return to you a Prabhakaran or two later! If soon, due to Sirisena shenanigans, or in the 2019-20 election cycle, a MR-GR-SLPP regime returns, I am unable now to predict how Tamils and Muslims will respond. But remember, the racist leopard does not change its spots, neither will a populace live long oppressed.

Dividends from restoring democracy

I need to make a crucial point of long-term significance. Reinstating democracy has enabled the return of independent officials to key positions. The Central Bank Governor who exercises power appropriately, the Elections Commission Chairman and Members who do what they have to and tell PM and President to push-off if need be, the Supreme Court whose newfound independence would in Rajapaksa days have seen the old fogies impeached or ‘Lasanthad’, and the Auditor General.

This creates a new imperative. If high officials are acting without fear or favour it is of the utmost importance that only persons of high calibre head Commissions, Corporations and positions of public oversight. No more botches like the deplorable Sri Lankan Airlines Chairman and Board, the clueless but dicey Telecoms Regulator and other rotten choices of yahapalana Ministers. Yes, Ministers have to be chosen to balance political factions and the public keeps returning riff-raff to Parliament, so nothing can be done to improve Cabinet quality. The way to balance this is to put tough, rough and able institutional heads in place. (See box Nothcote-Trevelyn Report). Though Sri Lanka must ensure that only the best and the brightest are appointed to head public bodies, in the wake of the rising semi-fascist backlash, such hopes may sound like farting against thunder.

Brief remarks on the economy

I need to talk about getting real on economic exposition. Ranil and Mangala wet themselves fantasizing that they are neoliberals. They are not! It’s damned funny; bogus populists and dead-leftists, clueless about neoliberalism, vociferously allege that these two are neoliberals; but in action they are not. Sure, the duo sings neoliberal duets, cheered by JR’s ideological progeny, but what of their actions? They are handcuffed, bolted and condemned to a state-driven economic strategy. Who said FDI was $1.4 billion last year? Most was direct or indirect, state-to-state; Hambantota, Colombo Port City, power-projects, LNG terminal, proposed Eastern Economic Zone, new highways! PM and FM, how much private capital investment came as FDI last year and has been included in your much repeated $1.4 billion?

Ranil’s fantasies are dead in the Twenty-First Century; but it is unlikely, Ranil or Mangala, if they remain in office much longer, have the inclination or the intelligence to switch to an explicitly dirigisme, mixed-economic, strategy. Worse, if the Rajapaksa gang takes over economic policy will be pure mayhem; a swindler’s mad house!

The cornered mouse

And that brings me to Sirisena, the mouse that roared. He is in a corner; castrated, he has to go in one of three ways; kneel before MR, embrace Ranil more tightly, or choose to have no executive ambition beyond 2020. The difference is that in former two he salivates after crumbs from MR or the UNP after 2020 – a ceremonial role. Otherwise he relinquishes greed and seeks an honourable exit. Maybe he can devote time to rooting out corruption, though frankly, I think that, now, all politically controversial prosecutions will be side-lined thanks to the wisdom of our voters.

Sirisena blows as he wills; beyond logic and balmy. Be that as it may, a danger has surfaced and citizens must mobilise. To whom must a call to guard against the return of Rajapaksa be directed? Those who stand for democracy, the January 8 Movement, the left in all its complexions, the national minorities who are first in the firing line and constitute over a quarter of the population, and liberals whose spines did not jellify at the first sign of setback. The battle has only just begun. The dark side is unified and mobilising; but democrats, the left, national minorities and bold liberals are splintered into a hundred pieces. This is the first task to address.

Heed the message of the electorate …and get on with Government!


Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu-2018-02-18

It is a February to remember and for the Government, one it would like to forget. The victorious populist backlash led by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa in a Local Government election has put into serious question the political fortunes of the government, its constituent parties and their leadership to the extent that since the election results were announced on 11 February, the impression, if not the reality, is one of instability and uncertainty. In politics, perceptions matter and the dominant perception is that the Rajapaksas are on their way back to power – There are provincial council elections, a presidential election and a general election all within the space of the next two and half years with the presidential election due in November/December 2019.

Clearly, the national electorate has sent the government a stern rebuke and a sharp wake-up call – things cannot go on as they have, promises made have to be delivered upon, the electorate cannot be taken for granted. The message is not just to the Government, but the main political parties that constitute it, as well. It is pivotally important to see it as such and not to mistake rebuke, however scathing, for definitive repudiation.

This isn't rocket science. In a functioning democracy any government elected, especially on a platform of reform, has to deliver.

Moreover, it has to carry the people along with it. Communication of vision, of policy and programme, of what is being done, what isn't and why, is paramount. Ceding the space for public discourse to the opposition to define the issues of the day retards the reform project, even risks its abandonment. The key constituent elements of this Government, if they are to govern for its full term, have to arrive at a policy consensus for the remainder of its term without delay and communicate this to the country and the world at large, cogently and coherently. There cannot be the problems of command, control and communication that have dogged this Government from the outset or the backbiting that has characterized it in the final phase of the election campaign, which still continues. There has to be a sense of urgency about this or else the perception that we do not in effect have a Government and will not until the next national election, will take hold. No one, surely wants that, irrespective of personal or party political fortunes?

As much as the Rajapaksa forces will move to consolidate their substantial support in the country, the UNP as the main party in Government and the largest party in Parliament, has to heed the message of the electorate and rebrand itself fast or else risk further humbling if not humiliating defeat into the future. The Prime Minister has announced that he will continue in office and that the party will now focus on grooming its leadership for the future. Not everyone is convinced that the latter will actually happen – a sense of déjà vu prevails – and not everyone is convinced that he should continue as Prime Minister. Personal preferences and partisan bias notwithstanding, the future leadership of the UNP has to be decided by the UNP and the Prime Minister, by Parliament.

According to media reports, the President is seeking legal advice on how to remove the Prime Minister, given the constraints of the 19th Amendment to the Constitution. There is no parliamentary tradition of a Prime Minister and/or Government resigning on account of a defeat, however stinging, at a Local Government election. It would best serve the country if the matter is resolved without delay where it should, and that is in Parliament. This would settle the damaging speculation of how many MPs have signed affidavits and pledged support for one side or another and clear the way for Government and governing and indeed governance, in response to the message of the country at large and consonant with the promises made in 2015.

It is indeed unfortunate that the President has intervened in the way that he has, with regard to the removal of the Prime Minister.

It reflects a lack of understanding of the 19th Amendment, the drafting of which he was party to, in particular the recalibrating of the powers of the executive and legislature. His entertaining the prospect of a new Prime Minister and apparent shopping around for one, is largely responsible for the prevailing uncertainty about Government. He should let Parliament decide who commands its confidence.

Beyond the current political manoeuvring, is the paramount question of where the country is heading. It is incumbent upon current and would be leaders of government to lay out their vision for the country and the policies, which will realize their respective visions and in more than mere brush strokes. Are constitutional reform and transitional justice to be jettisoned? What happens on the economic front? And ETCA?

The challenges ahead are many and unavoidable; much needs to be done and undone. Government and governance requires both.

Political Uncertainty & Keeping Up Promises


Sarath Jayasuriya
logoFebruary 10th Local Government election is over. Unity government partners suffered a significant loss at the polls while a few months old party consisting of breakaways of UPFA constituent parties and the SLFP, emerged victorious with 44.69%. UNP retained 32.61% its block vote while the UPFA and SLFP spearheaded by the President was reduced to dismal 13.38% of the total votes polled. It was interesting to note that JVP has managed to increase its voter base to 6.26% overtaking even the SLFP.
Many pundits have joined the race to analyse the results by favouring their own interested political parties. No one has given an impartial analysis as yet. It is heart breaking to note that some news media both electronic and print, also joining the fray by publishing and displaying baseless stories just to beat up the drums driving the general public to run helter skelter for the truth.
Fact remains that, it was not an election to select candidates to the Legislative Assembly but to the local bodies. What we have just completed was a Local Government Election to elect local bodies such as Pradesheeya Sabhas, Urban Councils and Municipal Councils. It is a foregone conclusion and an acceptable scenario that the government in power always loses elections to local bodies. This is such a situation but in a greater magnitude. How did such a turn of events occur?
We need to understand the composition of the present government. M. Sirisena, two days after he was sworn in as the President the present Prime Minister was sworn in removing the then Prime Minister along with the cabinet of Ministers. A new cabinet was appointed breaking all the promises given, increasing the number in the cabinet way beyond 30. The parliament MPs over the divide flocked around the President and the newly appointed Prime Minister to canvass for Ministerial positions. The action by these members was encouraged by both leaders in the name of gaining a 2/3rd majority in the parliament for the purpose of introducing a new constitution which never happened except for brining in the 19th amendment.
However the 19th amendment was welcome by all since the article 31 of the constitution was amended to “(2) No person who has been twice elected to the office of President by the People, shall be qualified thereafter to be elected to such office by the People” which explains that the number of terms that a person could hold office of the President is limited to two terms. 19th amendment also included appointment of Seven (7) commissions which was greatly appreciated by the intelligent public.
One needs to take stock of the current situation carefully. As per the constitution President cannot remove the Prime Minster until he is made to understand that the PM no longer commands the majority in the Parliament. Even if PM does not command the majority in Parliament he cannot be removed unless the PM gives his resignation in writing.
Article 42 of the constitution clearly states “ 42 (2) The Prime Minister shall continue to hold office throughout the period during which the Cabinet of Ministers continues to function under the provisions of the Constitution unless he– (a) resigns his office by a writing under his hand addressed to the President; or (b) ceases to be a Member of Parliament”
The present PM was sworn in by the President immediately after the 2015 August General Elections, when the PM led UNF won 106 seats in the parliament. UNF government teamed up with minority parties to record a majority in the house to form a unity government. UPFA was fragmented and few members of the UPFA constituent parties with majority SLFP, under the advice of the President joined the government once again to command a 2/3rd majority in order to bring in promised constitutional changes such as the 19th amendment. Since the UPFA in general terms was supporting the unity government the TNA leader was nominated to the position of the Leader of the opposition.

Read More

Putinization Has Been Stopped but Sri Lanka Needs a New Ideological Project


The possibility of the Rajapaksa-led opposition using Sinhalese communalism to unsettle and undermine the new government of moderates is actually very real

Sri Lanka's new Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe walks past former President Mahinda Rajapaksa during the ceremony to swear Ranil Wickremesinghe in as Sri Lanka's new prime minister in Colombo on August 21, 2015. Wickremesinghe secured formal support from sections of the main opposition Friday for a broad coalition shortly after he sworn-in for a fourth-term. Wickremesinghe took his oaths before President Maithripala Sirisena at his office in Colombo over looking the Indian Ocean at a simple ceremony telecast live on national television. Shortly after the brief ceremony, a powerful section of opposition MPs loyal to President Sirisena entered into a formal agreement with Wickremesinghe's United National Party (UNP) to work together. Credit: Ishara K.
Sri Lanka’s new Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremasinghe, walks past former President Mahinda Rajapaksa during his swearing-in ceremony in Colombo on August 21, 2015. Shortly after the brief ceremony, a section of opposition MPs loyal to President Maithripala Sirisena’s SLFP entered into a formal agreement with Wickremasinghe’s United National Party to work together. Credit: Ishara K.

image BY  ON 

The most important consequence of Sri Lanka’s recent parliamentary election is that voters have prevented the Putinization of their country and its politics.

The August 17 election brought Ranil Wickremasinghe’s UNP-led coalition government back to power with an increased tally, though its 106 seats leaves it seven short of a majority in the 225-member parliament. It also prevented “strongman” Mahinda Rajapaksa from becoming prime minister in the style of Vladimir Putin. After two terms as Russia’s president, Putin became prime minister for one term in 2008, and then president after that. He continues to preside over a specific political order of autocratic authoritarianism that has taken hold in after the collapse of Gobrachev’s perestroika experiment.

The government’s consummate crisis in the 

face of Mahinda’s unconsummatable win 


article_image

Rajan Philips-February 17, 2018, 12:00 pm


There is no pussyfooting around the political shellacking at last week’s polls, that the President’s and the Prime Minister’s teams got at the hands of Mahinda Rajapaksa’s budding party of old bloomers. Not surprisingly, the shellacking has precipitated a consummate crisis in the so called national-unity government. While the results of the local government elections have created the current crisis in the national government, the same results cannot provide any mechanism or mandate for resolving that crisis. Nor can the impressively lopsided success at the local elections directly enable Mahinda Rajapaksa to replace the government at the national level. Put another way, SLPP cannot nationally consummate its aggregate win at the local elections. It can, however, create havoc for the unity government and it is doing so in spades. The government leaders, on the other hand, are scrambling with no one showing any capacity to take control of the situation and restore even a semblance of order.

A rude but entirely predictable electoral shock


The Sunday Times Sri Lanka
Those who are bewildered by the results of Sri Lanka’s local government elections a week ago need a harsh reality check if not a resounding knock to the head..

Massive public discomfiture

For it must be said that the rude punishment dealt by the electorate to the Sirisena-Wickremesinghe coalition government was entirely predictable. From mid last year to perhaps even earlier, massively increasing public discomfiture had turned to outright anger directed towards a coterie of quarreling and oftentimes openly incompetent rulers.
Granted, there were notable improvements in the Rule of Law. Yet the approach of the United National Party (UNP) driving the unity Government and equally blinded Colombo based civil society acolytes were informed by a deeply disturbingly elitist and patronizing mind frame. Ordinary citizens in the North and the South were treated much llike obedient cattle, to be shepherded and thought-manipulated into uncomplaining quiescence as high games of bond scams, wastage of public funds and an engineered ‘reconciliation process’ continued.

Committees sat in esoteric constitutional reform exercises in Colombo that touched on all the unhappy trigger points that had divided the Sri Lankan people since independence, such as religion, language and political power while the larger public was unforgivably left excluded and increasingly incensed. The image of an out-of-touch Government dictated to by international pressure grew even as the ‘yahapalanaya’ shine faded, aggravated by fulsome praise on the part of Western emissaries whose visits became disconcertingly frequent. Unsurprisingly this formed a useful point for the Rajapaksa opposition to labour.

The old devil of an unpatriotic UNP was resuscitated,leading to deadly cause and effect where the popular imagination was concerned.

Contrast between the elite and the marginalised

As commonly reminded, insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Well, for the unfortunate citizenry of this country, that lunacy has been exemplified by the conduct of the UNP for the exact same mistakes committed in 2001-2003 by the then ruling United National Front (UNF) government were repeated this time around as well.

And crucially, basic governance faltered, resulting in serious economic consequences for the already poor and marginalised, including farmers being denied their fertiliser in the paddy growing regions of the land. Talking to rural voters in the areas of the North Central province and the Uva province, it was pointed out in these column spaces months ago that it was a grave misconception to think that village voters were not aware of the shenanigans going on in Colombo. Indeed, that awareness existed in painful and excruciating detail.

At that time, I drew the grotesque contrast between farmers protesting in regard to inadequate fertiliser supplies in the sweltering sun while white-collar crooks in slick suits got away with millions shielded by patronage politics.
The truth of that could not be glossed over by blustering damage control in the last few months before the elections nor by rhetoric by the President. Where the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) component of the Government was concerned, this was also percieved to be inefficient with some Ministers attracting as much censure as their UNP counterparts.

And most damagingly, the anti-corruption drive against the gross corruptors of the Rajapaksa era fizzled out in a splutter of damp squibs from 2015 itself. The public grew weary of watching front-liners of the previous regime walk to courts and back smiling broadly for the television cameras amidst halfhearted explanations of laws delays and uncooperative foreign governments by UNP Ministers.

Deep cynicism regarding introspection

But ensconced in a comforting and un-apologetically elitist Colombo bubble of misplaced complacency, eagerly nourished by advisors and civil society cheerleaders through the reassuring echo chambers of social media, the unity alliance seemed unprepared for the inevitable electoral shock sooner or later. In fact, there was a deep cynicism about the very need for introspection.

When justifiable critiques were made regarding failures of governance in early 2015 in these column spaces and elsewhere, these were dismissed as irrelevant. When the Prime Minister appeared in a show of bravado before the popularly termed Central Bank Treasury Bond Commission of Inquiry, there were showers of praise from the typically deluded, hailing the fact that this was the first time that a Prime Minister had deigned to grace a commission sitting.

Former President Chandrika Kumaratunga responded in a reprehensible congratulatory message and apologists of all shapes and forms scrambled to disguise basic failures of financial accountability.

Other ironies abounded. This was a contest conducted at the lowest levels of Sri Lanka’s electoral hierarchy for local government councils but which saw a President, a Prime Minister and a former President exchanging blows in clear games of political upmanship. And the outcome was foreseeable.

Weighing heavily in favour of former President Mahinda Rajapaksa on 10th February 2018, voters showed the contemptuous middle finger to all and sundry. It was a devastating blow to the exuberance of the democratic gains made in 2015

Gross inequities of ‘yahapalanaya’ rule

So let us be clear about one fact. The gross inequities of ‘yahapalanaya’ rule are at the root of Saturday’s electoral debacle. The blame is to be attributed fairly and squarely to this Government.

In the face of looming provincial and national level elections in the near future, the unity alliance must even now, look inwards and attempt serious course correction, if further ignominious defeats are to be avoided.

The alternative is too catastrophic to contemplate.

Hopper Drama II – The Inside Story: Ranil-Maithri Rift Rooted In Presidential Ambitions

logo
The estrangement between President Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremsinghehas its roots in the former’s desire to remain as President until 2025 and not the ‘crisis’ produced by the results of the local government elections where the parties led by both men suffered heavily.
Sajith and Sirisena | File photo
Colombo Telegraph reported in October 2017 that there were plans for Sirisena to continue as President beyond 2025, although he had pledged on numerous occasions that he would be a one-term president, that he would not contest another presidential election and even said there won’t be another such election.
This was when Dr Jayampathy Wickramaratne, MP and Chairman of the committee providing technical support to the constitution-making process told a group of Tamil expatriates in London that the Committee was agreeable to Sirisena being given a second term subject to him being elected through parliament.
According to Wickramaratne, it was a gesture of appreciation of a man who gave leadership to set the constitutional-reform ball rolling. He said that it amounts to a ‘phasing-out of the executive presidency.‘
The complete abolition will happen in 2025, not by promises, but through its scripting in the constitution, he said.
After being briefed on all this, President Sirisena had discussed the proposal with Wickremesinghe, who had rejected it. Wickremesinghe also objected to the constitutional reform packaged introduced by former president Chandrika Kumaratunga in 2000 over a similar transitional provision that would have allowed her to remain as President until 2005.
A dismayed Sirisena had told Wickremesinghe that this would compel him, Sirisena, to work as the leader of the SLFP and in terms of the interests of that party. Wickremesinghe had apparently said that as the leader of the SLFP it is entirely up to Sirisena to do what he believes is best for his party.
Following this, Shiral Laktilleka, one of the key advisors to Sirisena, had arranged a meeting between the President and Sajith Premadasa, a longtime aspirant to the position of UNP Leader.

Read More