Make way for solutions as options narrow

By Jehan Perera

Deputy Speaker Siyambalapitiya initially resigned from his position when a section of the government backbenchers decided to become independent due to the mounting protests against the government of which they were a part.  He was persuaded to contest again as the candidate of the members who were not a part of the government and who now were a majority or close to being that.  But when the government members also decided to support the amiable former Deputy Speaker, he once again was perceived to be the candidate of the government.

In the immediate aftermath of the election of the Deputy Speaker it seems that the government had rallied support to itself and still had close to a two-thirds majority. This cast a damper on the prospects for an end to the stalemate that has the people in large numbers demanding publicly that the government should quit, but the government refusing to quit.  The impression of strength also cast doubt on the success of the general strike and hartal that was planned for the following day.  However, the impression of strength was quickly dispelled when the victorious candidate resigned the following day from his position.

The fiasco over the election of the Deputy Speaker has exposed the confusion within the government that makes it necessary for it to step down and give way to the new.  Foreign Minister Prof G L Peiris was the latest to have his house visited by a group of protestors who handed over a demand that he should support the no-confidence motion against the government proposed by the Opposition and also vote to abolish the 20th Amendment that created a super-presidency.  Protesters outside of the residence of former Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremasingha had harsh words to convey to him for refusing to face them outside of his private residence. However, they did not face the indignity of being hooted as suffered by Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa when he visited the sacred Bodhi tree in Anuradhapura

WORSENING CRISIS

Members of the government cannot face the general public anymore.  Indeed, the potential for violence at the present time is ever present.  Tempers are running short in many places where people have been waiting in queues for weeks outside petrol stations and gas outlets.  Those who block main roads to vent their frustration with the government also inconvenience their fellow citizens who have their own matters to attend to.  It is a testimony to prevalent ethos of non-violence and mindfulness that the mass protests have been peaceful for so long.

In declaring a state of emergency for the second time in barely a month, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa appears to be preparing for the crisis to worsen.   In the face of an impending general strike, the government may feel it needs to deploy the military to take on essential services, such as maintaining electricity and water supply. The rumour mills have been at work to suggest that a campaign to suppress the protestors by violent means is being planned.  A key target would be the dismantling of the three main protest sites in Colombo, opposite the Presidential Secretariat, Temple Trees, which contains the Prime Minister’s office, and in the vicinity of Parliament.

On the more positive side, the President also appears to be preparing for compromise.  He has met with the Bar Association who have been performing a yeoman service in terms of upholding the basic rights of free assembly, speech and public protest by going in hundreds, when necessary, to protect the rights of those arrested by the police during the protest campaign.  The Bar Association has put forward a set of proposals that give a framework for resolving the political deadlock.   The President is reported to be prepared to consider the Bar Association proposals which would be a breakthrough to a path of conflict resolution.

 RATIONAL WAY

The key features of the Bar Association proposals call for a solution on the lines of the public demand that the President and Prime Minister should go and a new government, that is minus the Rajapaksa family, should be established.  It calls for the establishment of an interim government of national unity in which the Prime Minister is one who is able to establish a consensus among all political parties to enact necessary reforms. Second, it calls for a 21st Amendment to the Constitution by repealing the provisions of the 20th Amendment and restoring the 19th Amendment.  There is also a call for the abolition of the executive presidency at a subsequent stage.

The sooner the government and President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in particular, accept the Bar Association principles, and transition to a new government, the better it will be for the country.  Unlike in Myanmar, the state in Sri Lanka is based on democracy and not on a military machine.  Also, unlike in Myanmar, the Sri Lankan economy is totally dependent on foreign largesse for its survival at the present time.  The donor countries who call the shots in Sri Lanka are those that have a democratic ethos so a crackdown by the military will not be viable.

There is no rational way out for the government leadership but to go with the flow.  Public opinion is very strongly against them.  They have lost their mandate to govern by the very fact of having led the country into the worst debacle ever.  Economic reality is also against them.  The foreign exchange crisis is getting worse by the day and with it the inability to import the fuel, gas, food and medicine necessary to sustain the economy and the lives of the people.  This is evident in the fact that the queues are getting longer and the people are getting angrier by the day.  The longer the delay, the more irreversible the hatred will be.

NEXT CHALLENGE

The Bar Association proposals have been developed with the present political and economic impasse in mind. They state that their overarching requirement is the establishment of “a stable Government with the ability to implement reforms domestically and the ability/credibility to negotiate with the IMF, other multilateral agencies, and friendly countries to help Sri Lanka get out of the economic crisis.”  However, there are other major issues that need to be considered also if Sri Lanka is to truly turn the corner.  The most fundamental of these is to solve the ethnic conflict that gave rise to war that lasted three decades and which undermined the country’s long-term prospects for economic and political development.

Although there is ethnic minority and religious representation in the ongoing protests in Colombo, the open agitation in the predominantly Tamil speaking parts of the country is less.  This is explained on the grounds that the strong military presence in those areas makes the people more vulnerable to harassment.  There is also a sense that the people there did not vote for the government and there is no guarantee that the next one will consider their problems either.  The challenge that needs to be taken up, sooner rather than later, is a need to better ensure the participation of national minorities who are regional majorities into the structures of governance.

A salutary provision such as Section 29 of the first constitution after independence that sought to prevent discrimination needs to be enacted. Even the basic issue of language remains unresolved with the Tamil language still meted out step-motherly treatment when it comes to singing the national anthem or being used in police stations even in predominantly Tamil-speaking areas. The executive powers of the governors in the provinces, which are even more than the powers of the president in the country, need to be done away with it. These are not issues that the Bar Association proposals deal with and need to be taken up by other organisations.  Resolving them can open up new channels of goodwill and support to the new government from both within the country and from the international community.