Cross over scoffing, and scoffing at crossovers

By Dilrukshi Handunnetti, Our Lobby Correspondent

The general feeling, going by the antics of both main parties, is that here's a government, after five years of rule, still in the opposition- at least in their mental make up and a UNP Opposition that finds it difficult to muster support for their various causes.

On Tuesday, adding credence to this theory were government rankers frantically protesting in front of the Nalanda Ellawala statue to pledge support to the very government they represented. The Cabinet rankers, once reputed for their 'minis damwel' and ' 'pada yatra's were at the vocal best- reminiscent of their long suffering opposition days.

With the government too busy protesting against UNP corruption, there was a high level of absenteeism in both UNP and PA ranks in the House by the Diyawanna.

The week was certainly eventful, with the rumor mill working overtime speculating a dissolution of parliament, and the crossover of P. Chandrasekran of the Upcountry People's Front to the UNP.

But the lack of numbers didn't prevent the upsurge of heat levels in the House. It was UNP's John Amaratunge who sought to draw blood by way of a personal explanation, and ridiculed the government by attacking its stance on corruption on the very morning it sought to pledge commitment to curb corruption.

He scoffed that while government benches were taking to the streets calling for corruption curbing, it was none other than those very same members who were corrupt. So he urged that the secret documents and annexures be placed before the House. At this suggestion Minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle, jumped to the PA's defence, true to style.

"Names of your cabinet members have transpired, hence the shyness," thundered Mr. Amaratunge, and Mr. Fernandopulle displaying his customary zeal, pounced on the UNPer accusing him of slinging mud at the PA.

"What more is there to sling mud at," asked the burly UNP challenging an already ruffled Mr. Fernandopulle with a sarcastic " Please come here if your seat is uncomfortable on that side. We'd take you anytime."

The debate began smoothly with little or no reference by minister Ratwatte to the tragic incidents of the past months. And the UNP ers scoffed- here was a minister who has mastered the art of minimal speaking but massive blundering. While Mr. Ratwatte referred to the escape of the statue of "Our Lady of Madhu" a miracle, UNPers chanted that the miracle was only Jayalath Jayawardene's prudence in gifting a special bullet proof casket for the statue.

Opening the debate for the UNP, John Amaratunge was in his element charging there were plans by the PA to stuff ballot boxes. "Your military operations were proved futile, and three significant camps were overrun within the week. The PA's successes were the series of blunders and losses" he said.

Looking straight at the Special Assignments minister Nanda Mathew who smugly viewed Mr. Amaratunge from his second row seat, he claimed the PA had become a rubbish dump. "Our rubbish on your side with special tags," he scoffed.

"How much was your fee," asked burly Premaratne Gunasekera, while Speaker K.B. Ratnayake tried to make peace by advising them not to insult former friends.

Then it was UNP's Tyronne Fernando's turn to make some predictions. Barring the 1989 polls marred by JVP violence, this election had all signs of being the bloodiest, he observed. He said that it was in this backdrop that UNP headquarters were attacked by PSD goondas.

He also spoke on the speculated dissolution of Parliament and said MPs would have many grievances in the event of a dissolution as a caretaker cabinet would function.

"With a dissolution, you seek to cripple the opposition and withdraw resources. The UNP was formidable enough to face any election but the fact remained that the government was resorting to either unethical or undemocratic means to curb the opposition," he charged.

PA's new entrant H.R. Mithrapala opined that strict action should be taken against those who lobbied for mass spoiling of votes with total disregard to democratic norms.

At his humorous best, UNP chief whip W.J.M. Lokubandara. predicted of a new dawn- a new president- and a new order in the new millennium. Dr. Jayalath Jayawardene was an angry man- angry that the government only tarnished his image than prove that he has done some wrong. Furious, the member threw all caution to the winds and challenged the government to arrest him if evidence existed against him.

" I have been accused of having LTTE links and of conspiring to topple the government. Yet recently, the government was ordered to compensate the ICRC driver who drove me to Vavuniya for politically victimizing him. To cover up your inability to address the grievances of the people, the UNP is being blamed for everything," he charged.

"People no longer trust you. There were no more Chandrika bangles. They pin hopes only on the UNP leader who has adapted a bipartisan prudent policy to redress the people" he declared- as government benches broke into peals of laughter.

Minister Ratwatte was in a dangerous mood when it came to the conclusion of the debate. Reputed for the occasional gibe but not for sustained attacks on political opponents, the minister counter charged that the UNP was in an unholy alliance with the LTTE- to hand over the North-East to the LTTE for two years.

"These were people who have suffered for decades and no political party had any right to play with their destiny in this cruel manner. It was a joke to believe that the LTTE would accede to be included in an Interim Council, or to share power with other Tamil parties."

The LTTE, he noted never brooked any opposition. And it is supposed to be the sole representative of the Tamil people. The UNP therefore cannot be allowed to barter with the country's sovereignty as a 'political gift' to the LTTE to secure political victory, the minister noted.

Freedom for the thought that we hate

Amidst their frenzied electioneering, is it too much to expect our candidates and their supporters to take a few moments off from slandering each other and ask themselves what it means to be a "representative of the people"?

Indeed, if they need any guidance on this matter, perhaps they could refer to the increasing number of fundamental rights judgements under the seal of the Supreme Court, castigating these "representatives of the people' for having abused their power.

They could be educated on the fact that gaining admittance to the Presidency or to Parliament does not mean that they are vested with some unholy right to do as they please.

They could also be reminded that as "representatives of the people", they are bound to protect and indeed encourage not only the opinion that they find pleasing but also opinions that they disagree with.

If they do not do this, they would be in direct violation of the constitution under which they are appointed to public office.

One of the strongest reprimands in this respect, coming appropriately less than three weeks before December 21 Presidential Elections, was delivered this Wednesday by a three-member Supreme Court bench comprising Justices A.R.B. Amerasinghe, A.S. Wijetunge and D.P.S. Gunesekera. In deciding that Member of Parliament Neil Rupasinghe and four members of the Wattala Pradeshiya Sabha had violated the rights of Vincent Peiris, Chairman of an environmental community organisation, by assaulting him and preventing him from attending a workshop on the Muthurajawela project, the Supreme Court said thus:

"Freedom of thought and expression is an indispensable condition if Sri Lanka is to be more than a nominally representative democracy. … it is only through free debate and exchange of ideas that the elected majority can be made responsive to and reflect the will of the people. The election of representatives does not imply that they may do as they will. Members of the public must be free to influence intelligently the decisions of those people, for the time being, empowered to act for them in matters which may effect themselves. … speech can rebut speech, propaganda will answer propaganda and that free debate of ideas will result in the wisest policies at least for the time being."

The case serves as a text book illustration for both our leaders and their cohorts. The controversy revolved round not a politically volatile meeting as one might suppose but a seemingly innocuous environmental workshop for which Mr. Peiris had been invited to in his capacity as a community leader representing some 1000 families in the area.

The issue was the implementation of the Muturajawela Master Plan initiated by the Greater Colombo Economic Commission for the sustainable development of the Muthurajawela/Negombo Lagoon area. Apparently, there had been some tension between politicians of the area and the people over the implementation of the plan.

Mr. Peiris complained that when he had gone to attend the workshop on the invitation of the Central Environmental Authority, Mr. Rupesinghe, Wattala Pradeshiya Sabha Chairman Daulton Suriyabandara, three other Pradeshiya Sabha members and about twenty other persons had accosted him and had demanded that he leave.

When he protested, he was assaulted by Mr. Suriyabandara and others. He then left the meeting and admitted himself to hospital.

His story, supported by medical records and statements to the police, was accepted by the Court.

The conduct of those who assualted came in for severe censure of the Court. In the words of Justice Amerasinghe "As the 'elected representatives of the people', they ought, in my view, to have appreciated the fact that the continued vitality of free speech is essential if democracy is to flourish and indeed if democratic institutions like Parliament and Pradeshiya Sabhas, of which, with justification, they proudly announced themselves to be members, were to survive."

Mr. Peiris described as a "capable and virtuous fighter on behalf of the rights of the people" went on to obtain Rs. 50,000 from each of his opponents as compensation for having violated his rights to freedom of speech, assembly and association. Mr. Peris is plucky enough to come before the Supreme Court and return to his community with a judgement in his favour, but there would be a hundred others suffering the same fate — powerless to stand up to the thuggery and intimidation of politicians who are caught up in their transitory moment of glory.

As the days count down to December 21, questions of party discipline to ensure responsibility for these continuing and disgraceful incidents should be foremost in the thinking of presidential candidates. Instead, even the importance of the Supreme Court in acting as a redresser of such injustice is downgraded and those against whom these judgements are delivered continue regardless in office, in the best traditions of the past. What fortune we undoubtedly possess to live in Sri Lanka in this kind of day and age?

More News/Comment

Return to News/Comment Contents