A baby step in right direction

Wednesday 31st March, 2021

There has been a mixed reaction to the Election Commission (EC) decision to stop registering political parties with names associated with ethnicity or religion. The EC has said its move is aimed at facilitating national reconciliation. This is a baby step in the right direction, and much more remains to be done to usher in the reconciliation.

Sri Lanka and her political parties are like a poor mother with a large, malnourished brood. Most of these outfits are mere name-boards that only cause the elongation of ballot papers. The political parties worthy of the name can be counted on the fingers of one hand. But there is hardly anything the EC, or any other institution for that matter, can do about this. Many a nuisance has to be tolerated in the name of democracy.

However welcome the EC decision may be, one should not lose sight of the factors that have led to the emergence and growth of political parties catering exclusively to particular ethnic and religious communities. One main reason cited in justification of the formation of these political organisations, the vast majority of which represent ethnic and religious minorities, is that the interests of their communities are not looked after by the main political parties. This argument holds water to a considerable extent although one can argue that they make their leaders’ political ambitions out to be the interests of their communities. They are similar, in many respects, to the political parties formed by some Buddhist monks, who entered Parliament, vowing to save Buddhism but ended up being bracketed with power-hungry politicians. A group of monks who contested the last general election purportedly to protect Buddhism and secured one National List seat, fought an epic battle among themselves to grab the single slot, reminding us of the legendary conflict between Chulodara and Mahodara over a jewel-encrusted throne.

Nothing could be further from the truth than the claim that the leaders of ethno-religious political parties representing minorities are driven solely by a genuine desire to serve the interests of their communities. They could be as self-serving as their majority counterparts. There are instances where they give the lie to their claims of grievances and injustices. How the TNA and the SLMC behaved following the conclusion of the war, and the anti-Muslim riots in Aluthgama in 2014, respectively, may serve as examples. During and after the final Eelam war, the TNA persistently accused the army of war crimes, but in 2010, it threw in its lot with Opposition presidential candidate Gen. Sarath Fonseka, who had led the army to victory. The TNA thus made a mockery of its war crimes claims. The SLMC, which left the Rajapaksa government, in 2014, blaming it for having done precious little to prevent the Aluthgama violence and bring the culprits to justice, had no qualms about joining a coalition which had, as a constituent, the JHU, which was accused of being sympathetic towards the BBS blamed for engineering the anti-Muslim riots at issue.

All politicians, representing the majority community and minorities, are guilty of abusing their ethno-religious identities for political expediency; they benefit from their communities’ herd mentality, which helps them secure block votes. They also exploit class and caste differences for this purpose, as evident from the way they select candidates for elections. What drives politicians is basically their thirst for power and privileges.

Meanwhile, what’s in a name? A party can change its name and constitution in compliance with the EC directive, but retain its ethno-religious agenda. Besides, there are already political parties that do not mention religion or ethnicity in their names or constitutions but are ethno-religious in all but name. One of the main criticisms against the ruling SLPP is that it serves the interests of only the majority community despite having members of other communities within its ranks. The UNP and the SJB claim to be minority friendly, but they too have glass ceilings that prevent the members of ethnic and religious minorities from securing leadership.

Only the left-wing political parties have remained above ethno-religious politics, but unfortunately their ideologies and agendas have not been able to attract enough public support. But their courage to be different is commendable.

A perquisite for the fructification of the efforts being made to facilitate national reconciliation by denying political parties based on ethnicity and/or religion registration with the EC is ensuring equal opportunities in the main political organisations for the members of all communities, religious or otherwise. This is not something that can be attained through legal means; the existing political culture will have to undergo a radical shake-up.