Columns

In the euphoria associated with the outcome of the presidential and parliamentary elections and the activity surrounding the formation of the new government and the appointment of cabinet ministers, two happenings that are reflective of the deterioration of the country’s political culture have not received the attention they deserve.

The first incident related to the public trading of allegations among the candidates of the Ranjan Ramanayake-led political party called the Voice of Democracy with the microphone as its symbol.   

At the latter stage of the campaign leading up to the parliamentary elections a rather shameful drama was enacted before the media which is symptomatic of the deterioration of values in the polity of the country. Two groups of candidates from Ramanayake’s party publicly traded allegations about how the party was funded and how the funds were distributed among themselves.

Although it was not possible to figure out the complete story over the cacophony of allegations that was hurled at each other by the disputants, it seemed that the party had been funded by a businessman of Sri Lankan origin domiciled in the United Kingdom and the dispute was about how the money was distributed among themselves rather than any policy or political differences between the rival groups. The fact that such an issue was openly talked about by the candidates without any concern as to how it would be perceived by the voters was itself an indictment on the level to which the country’s politics had fallen. What is equally disturbing is the unverified allegation by these candidates that the funder had also provided resources to other political parties.

This whole episode indicates that among some aspirants to political office, the policies that a party stands for (if any ) are not of any significance to the candidates but rather what is more important is what is there in it for themselves. This can only be viewed as a sign of moral bankruptcy of political aspirants. Fortunately the voters were wise enough to not return any candidate from that party.

Although the public had responded magnificently to the National Peoples Power’s call for a change in the political culture, much needs to be done at the social level to ensure that these newly identified negatives are addressed in time.

The second incident that is reflective of the moral bankruptcy that has gripped the polity is the controversy over the nomination of Ravi Karunanayake to Parliament from the National list of the Ranil Wickremesinghe led Alliance. Those in the Alliance who take issue with his nomination claim that there was no decision taken by the Alliance to nominate the former Finance Minister.

The United National Party (UNP) of which Ravi Karunanayake is a member has itself disputed the contention that there was an electoral agreement to offer a National List slot to a nominee by the New Democratic Front (NDF) whose gas cylinder symbol was used to contest the General Election in alliance with others.

The UNPs Chairman Wajira Abeywardena in a statement said a meeting was conducted among the leaders of the alliance partners of the NDF on November 16 with former President Ranil Wickremesinghe in the chair to decide on nominees to the National List seats won by the party at the election.

According to Mr. Abeywardene at that meeting it was decided to meet on November 19 at which a copy of the MoU between the Alliance parties was to be presented and a decision taken on the National List seats. The UNP Chairman further stated that ahead of the scheduled meeting the Secretary of the NDF Ms. Shermila Perera had taken steps to nominate Mr. Karunanayake and sent the name to the Election Commission to be gazetted.

Ravi Karunanyake has however told the media that his appointment from the NDF’s National List was legal, insisting that he was rightfully nominated by the party. He drew attention to the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Alliance partners in support of his contention.

Irrespective of which position is correct, it is apparent that the allegedly unilateral nomination of Ravi Karunanayake was hurriedly made without the concurrence of the leadership of the Alliance partners. Based on the contents of the MoU between the members of the MoU, even if Mr. Karunanayake was to be nominated there would have been less controversy if it was done after a collective decision of the Alliance Leaders.

In a way this incident too shows up the difference between the prevailing political culture and the new political culture that the Government of the NPP espouses and has pledged to implement. The NPP too has appointed a few defeated candidates to the National List slots but there has been no dissent from its Members unlike in the case of the NDF’s actions. It is also a reflection of the discipline of the ‘inexperienced’ NPP and the ‘experience’ of the NDF and its partners.

(javidyusuf@gmail.com)