Opinion
Saying NO to authoritarian governance
We, the undersigned individuals from academia, the professions, the corporate sector, the clergy, and civil society organisations, join all those citizens and groups in condemning the abduction, arrest, detention without due process, and other acts of abusive Presidential and State authority, committed against persons who participated in the Aragalaya Peoples’ Movement. We condemn the acts of violence that occurred during this time. However, we reject the narrative that the Aragalaya was responsible for the violence, and that it has been transformed into a “fascist,” “anarchist,” “terrorist,” group, that has destroyed State and private property, and is determined to destabilise our country. We also reject the constant and dangerous media messages reinforcing this state rhetoric, and aimed at discrediting the movement. Various peaceful struggles of the people, as in the recent past in the North and the East, have been discredited in a similar manner with similar rationales. A country which has been reduced to a failed state, cannot afford any longer to tolerate this false and arrogant disregard of the voice of the People by the government.
The short history of the Aragalaya movement is part of our national history, and we must reject the efforts of the President, the current Pohottuwa government with its ever present Rajapaksa family, and even some sections of the media, to represent the Aragalaya as a fascist, terrorist, movement and distort that reality.
The Aragalaya Movement has attempted to hold the Pohottuwa government in office, responsible for the country’s bankruptcy and the denial of basic needs of the People, in an unprecedented context of economic and political instability and chaos. Our Constitution in its Preamble assures to all of us “freedom … and fundamental rights as “the intangible heritage that guarantees the dignity and wellbeing of succeeding generations of the People”. The “freely elected Representatives of the People” in pursuance of that mandate are required to “humbly acknowledge (their) obligations to the People.” These foundational values are incorporated in the specific Articles 3 and 4 of the Constitution, and have been interpreted many times in our Supreme Court.
Sovereignty is therefore in the “People,” and Parliament and the Executive must exercise their powers in a manner that ensures that Sovereignty can be “exercised and enjoyed” by the People (Article 4). Fundamental rights must be “respected, secured and advanced” by both these organs of government (Article 4(d) and CANNOT be restricted except when it is legal, proportionate and reasonable, in the manner defined in Article 15.
The Aragalaya and its objectives of challenging bad governance, therefore, conforms to the demands and vision of the Constitution on the responsibilities of Parliament and the Executive in governance. The phrase “lost mandate” used in the Aragalaya, refers to the loss of the Pohottuwa President’s and government’s right to exercise their powers of governance, as the legislature and executive on behalf of the Sovereign People. A government forfeits its mandate to govern by gross mismanagement, abuse of power and corruption, and by destroying social cohesion through its anti-minority rhetoric. We must remember that the Aragalaya movement also established a lost connectivity in this country between individuals and communities of different races and religions. This was a powerful statement of a unity of purpose and vision, and togetherness between majority and minority communities, in a country which had experienced the trauma of ethnic and religious conflict.
It is because the People related to this idea of the lost mandate, and a common national identity that the Aragalaya was able to mobilize broad based support, especially among the youth of this country. We as citizens must recognize that we have a right to struggle for transformative change in governance. The right to freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of speech and information, freedom of protest are legitimate forms of democratic dissent and part of this right. The history of countries shows it is the exercise of the right of dissent and the claiming of rights by broad based People’s movements, that helps achieve political transformation including institutional reforms. We must therefore challenge President Wickremesinghe and the government’s attempts to say that there is a difference between an aragalaya (struggle) and a ‘kerella’ (rebellion).
We call upon our fellow citizens to understand and reflect on these realities. They should not be misled by this false and devious narrative. It is critically important, at this time of national crisis, to reject the authoritarian governance of President Wickremesinghe and the Pohottuwa government, in the name of law and order. We must remember that the takeover of the President’s House and state buildings on 9th July by the Aragalaya movement was peaceful, and not accompanied by violence to persons or property. The looting and destruction of property in these buildings that occurred later, after the protesters left the premises, was because the government and law enforcement authorities made no effort to be present at those locations, and prevent such lawlessness. In retrospect it seems as if this was deliberate, and intended to discredit the Aragalaya movement.
We must remind ourselves that it was the Aragalaya protesters who handed over to the Police cash amounting to millions of rupees found in President’s House. Any shortfall in the amount handed over by the protesters must surely be explained by the Police, who had custody of this cash for three weeks. The Aragalaya activists gathered near Parliament, but did not attempt to storm the Parliament building. They stated publicly that they would not gather near Parliament during and before the proceedings connected with the election of the new President. When the President states that the Aragalaya movement was meant to overthrow and undermine the institution of Parliament by force, he is denying these realities. Contrast the events of 2018, when Parliamentarians perpetrated acts of violence and destroyed property and denigrated the office of the Speaker of the House, within the Chamber of Parliament. This was with complete impunity. Shockingly, Minister Bandula Gunewardene of the Pohottuwa government, even said in Parliament recently that impunity was a part of Parliamentary privilege. This highlights that the narrative about extra Constitutional and anarchist efforts to capture governance is flawed.
It is also ironical that the Aragalaya is now being accused of unlawfully entering State property and looting artifacts and damaging state property, when the enormous financial loss caused to the country by corruption and gross mismanagement of national resources by politicians and public officials of this government, and in the Bond scam during the Yahapalanaya government, have not been prosecuted in any legal proceedings. No one has up to now been held accountable, despite the appointment of many Commissions, and frequent investigations.
The President’s new discourse outlined in his policy statements to Parliament and the nation, suggests that the State is going to make institutional arrangements to sponsor the Aragalaya with hotlines, a high-powered committee and administrative arrangements. This is surely a peculiar interpretation of the abiding values embedded in the right of protest and dissent of the People. Amazingly, these plans and policies of the President have been combined with the declaration of a State of Emergency accompanied by draconian Gazette regulations. These measures have empowered the armed forces and the police to suppress dissent, and violate the constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights of citizens. The President’s constant adulation of the military, his frequent visits and interactions with the armed forces, send a chilling message of militarism in governance. These actions are supported by a reckless, irresponsible, and sometimes corrupt constituency of Pohottuwa Parliamentarians, who helped to elect President Wickremasinghe to office, and are still members of this government.Given these appalling realities, we as citizens ask the President and the Opposition Parties to address the following important matters.
For the President:
1. Recognise that in our Constitution Article 4, the Executive President holds office as the person “ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE.” The Constitution provides for a transfer of power to a President ELECTED BY MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT due to a vacancy in the Presidency. This should not be interpreted to mean that a President who takes office, after a discredited ex-President has vacated the post, can claim to hold office for the balance term of that ex-President, and his government. The loss of legitimacy of the predecessor President and government surely affects the idea of continuity. President Wickremesinghe should, therefore, in keeping with foundational democratic values, not seek to hold office for the full BALANCE TERM of the former President.
2. Clarify what he means by the mandate given to him to “introduce systemic change in governance on behalf of the silent majority.” All we see is that he has engaged in various measures which entrench dictatorial governance. Even more dangerously, he is justifying authoritarianism in governance on the myth of threats to national security. He is also framing the need for national unity and an all-party consensus at this time, as the essential need for cooperation from the opposition parties, with the discredited Pohottuwa government.
This is in fact encouraging the public and these parties to disregard the flagrant corruption and abuse of power that caused this dreadful man-made disaster in our country, and the very rationale for Gotabaya Rajapaksa being forced to run away. We are encouraged to forget why all his family members were forced out of office. After all, it was the Aragalaya initiative that helped the nation to recognise the responsibilities and accountability of the Rajapaksa led Pohottuwa government for abysmal governance and abuse of power.
3. We call upon him to act on the clearly articulated demands of the Aragalaya. Their concept of systemic change is a corruption free government that is not engaged in reckless abuse of powers. They want an abolition of the Executive Presidency, and strong institutions that respect the rights and needs of the People. Therefore, fulfilling his oath of office, the President must WITHDRAW THE STATE OF EMERGENCY which has NO RATIONALE OR JUSTIFICATION WHATSOEVER at this time. He must respect, protect and implement the fundamental rights of the People, including the right to protest and dissent. Such action must be accompanied by the release of all those participants in the Aragalaya held in custody under orders of arrest and detention, and restoration of their right to freedom of movement and overseas travel.
4. Recognising himself as an INTERIM PRESIDENT he must act under the Constitutional provisions and hold a General Election as soon as he is empowered to dissolve Parliament. This will enable the country to decide on the next government. In the interim period, he should implement the general demand in the country today for a government representative of all parties, without reinstating the discredited Pohottuwa government. He clearly made a promise to the nation on the 13th of July that he would resign as PM and only hold office till an all-party interim government was appointed. The huge trust deficit that he acknowledged then must be recognised now by President Wickremesinghe, if he is to lead an all-party interim government.
5. President Wickremesinghe should not waste time on ad hoc Constitutional reforms such as the 22nd Amendment. Even the much publicized 19th Amendment had serious problems achieving a balance of powers between President and Prime Minister. It had many other shortcomings, as evidenced in the constitutional crisis of 2018. The President should immediately take steps to ensure the abolition of the Executive Presidency before Parliamentary elections are held. The 21st Amendment that went before the courts, addressed this critical demand for constitutional reform and an early abolition of the Executive Presidency. This can be enacted without delay with a time frame for transfer of power.
For the Opposition Parties:
Respond to the current situation in the interests of the nation, but not in such a manner as to ensure the continuation of the Pohottuwa Cabinet and government. We expect them to also respect and advance the fundamental rights of the People. They must take a stand on repealing the Emergency and in particular in supporting an interim All-Party government, that does not seek to deny or restrict the right of dissent and protest of the People. This must be their contribution to helping the All-Party Interim government this country needs at this time. Co-operation with a discredited government is not a solution to the current economic and political crisis, though it is advocated by some religious leaders and some media.
In conclusion, if President Ranil Wickremesinghe takes the above course of action, he will be recognized by the country as a person who lived up to his declared commitment to a system of Parliamentary democracy, and respect for the Rule of Law, in such a system. He should not acquire the mantle of “strong man” leadership and authoritarian governance, that yoke of corrupt and selfish Rajapaksa family rule of decades, that has burdened this country and almost destroyed it. If he does so, he will not lead Sri Lanka to an era of economic recovery, and political stability (including resolution of national question), but rather throw us all into an abyss of continuing unaccountable and undemocratic governance.
1. Prof. Arjuna Aluwihare, Emeritus Professor of Surgery, University of Peradeniya 2. Prof. Savitri Goonesekere – Emeritus Professor of Law, former Vice Chancellor, University of Colombo 3. Prof. Harendra de Silva – Emeritus Professor of Paediatrics, University of Colombo
4. Prof. Jayadeva Uyangoda –Emeritus Professor , University of Colombo
5. Prof. Priyan Dias -Emeritus Professor, University of Moratuwa
6. Prof. Deepika Udagama – University of Peradeniya
7. Prof. Arjuna Parakrama – University of Peradeniya ,
8. Prof. Gameela Samarasinghe – University of Colombo
9. Prof. Camena Guneratne –Open University of Sri Lanka
10. Prof. Sasanka Perera – Department of Sociology, South Asian University
11. Bishop Duleep de Chickera
12. Bishop Kumara Illangasinghe
13. Dr.G.Usvatte-aratchi – Economist, UN Secretariat in New York City, formerly Chairman, PAFFREL and Chairman, Law and Society Trust
14. Dr. Ranil Abayasekara – Senior Lecturer (retired), University of Peradeniya
15. Dr. Ranjini Obeyesekere- Retired Prof. Princeton University, USA
16. Ameer Faaiz – Attorney at Law
17. Rev. Dr. Jayasiri Peiris
18. Dr. Sakuntala Kadirgamar – Executive Director, Law and Society Trust
19. Dr. Mario Gomez- Director, International Centre for Ethnic Studies
20. Dr. Chulani Kodikara- Researcher
21. Dr. D. C. Ambalavanar – Visiting Lecturer in Surgery, University of Jaffna
22. Dr. A C Visvalingam – former President, Citizens Movement for Good Governance
23. Rev. Andrew Devadason – Clergy, Anglican Church, Diocese of Colombo
24. Rajan Asirwathan – Former Precedent Partner and Country Head K PMG and former Chairman, Bank of Ceylon
25. Chandra Jayaratne – former Chairman, Ceylon Chamber of Commerce
26. Aneesa Firthous – Human Rights Activist
27. Aruna Shantha Nonis – Convenor, Janodaanya (Upward Breathing of People )
28. Dr. Farah Mihlar -Senior Lecturer, University of Exeter
29. Shiekh M.B.M.Firthous – Chairman, Bismi Institute
30. Ashila Niroshine Dandeniya- Executive Director, Stand Up Movement Lanka
31. Bisliya Bhutto – Former Member of Puttalam Pradeshiya Sabha
32. Buhary Mohamed- Human Rights Activist
33. Herman Kumara- National Convener, NAFSO
34. Christopher Dias
35. Deekshya Illangasinghe – Activist
36. Fr Nandana
37. Visakha Tillekeratne – Consultant, Food and Nutrition,
38. Geetha Lakmini Fernando .-Executive Director, Shramabhimani Kendraye
39. Juwairiya Mohideen- Women’s Rights Activist
40. Hemamali Perera- Attorney at Law, Human Rights Activist,
41. Jansila Majeed – Women Rights Activist
42. K. J. Brito Fernando – President, Families of the Disappeared
43. Marisa de Silva
44. Rev. Niroshan de Mel – Vicar of St. Michael and All Angels Church, Colombo 3
45. K.Nihal Ahamed -Social and Environment Activist, Katugastota
46. Shreen Saroor -Human Rights Activist
47. Krishanti Dharmaraj – Human Rights Advocate
48. Fr. Sarath Iddamalgoda
49. Mahaluxmy Kurushanthan – Women’s Rights Activist
50. Soraya M Deen – Attorney-at-Law
51. Mahishaa Balraj -Attorney-at-Law
52. Rev. Andrew Devadason- Anglican Church, Diocese of Colombo
53. Marian Pradeepa Sudarshani Coonghe – Administrative Secretary, Janawaboda Kendraya
54. Minoli de Soysa -Editor and writer
55. Mohamed Fairooz, – Journalist
56. Ranitha Gnanarajah -Attorney at Law
57. P. Jeyatheepa -Counsellor.
58. Fr. Adikarage Don Bennette Chrysanthus Mellawa- Director, Caritas Anuradhapura
59. S.C.C.Elankovan – Lawyer and Development Consultant
60. Janakie Abeywardane- Development Researcher
61. Mahbooba Rifaideen – Attorney at Law
62. P.M. Mujeebur Rahman – Journalist
63. Jayani Abeysekara- Human Rights Activist
64. Vanie Simon -Women’s Rights Activist
65. P.N.Singham – Activist
66. Fr. Rohan Silva – Director, Centre for Society and Religion
67. Sheila Richards – Civil Society Activist
68. Ramani Muttettuwegama,-Attorney at Law
69. Thiru Kandiah- Retired Academic
70. Yohesan Casiechetty – Attorney-at-Law and former Headmaster, St. Thomas’ Preparatory School, Kollupitiya
71. Ruwan Laknath Jayakody -Writer
72. S. Sumithra – Human rights Activist
73. Saman Kapila Wijesuriya -Co-Convenor Global Alliance for Justice for Easter Sunday Victims
74. P. Muthulingam- Executive Director, Institute of Social Development
75. Sandun Thudugala – Director Programmes and Operations, Law and Society Trust
76. Sirany Thevakumar – Community Activist
77. Rev. Rosairo SJ -. Chaplin Home for the Elders,
78. Sr. Deepa Fernando – Holy Family Congregation
79. Suren D. Perera – Attorney at Law,
80. Upendra Gunesekere – Human Rights activist
81. Safana Gul Begum -Attorney at Law
82. Vincent Bulathsinghala – Attorney at Law ,
83. Y.M Nawarathna – Human Rights Activist
Opinion
Child food poverty: A prowling menace
by Dr B.J.C.Perera
MBBS(Cey), DCH(Cey), DCH(Eng), MD(Paed), MRCP(UK), FRCP(Edin),
FRCP(Lon), FRCPCH(UK), FSLCPaed, FCCP, Hony FRCPCH(UK), Hony. FCGP(SL)
Specialist Consultant Paediatrician and Honorary Senior Fellow,
Postgraduate Institute of Medicine, University of Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Joint Editor, Sri Lanka Journal of Child Health
In an age of unprecedented global development, technological advancements, universal connectivity, and improvements in living standards in many areas of the world, it is a very dark irony that child food poverty remains a pressing issue. UNICEF defines child food poverty as children’s inability to access and consume a nutritious and diverse diet in early childhood. Despite the planet Earth’s undisputed capacity to produce enough food to nourish everyone, millions of children still go hungry each day. We desperately need to explore the multifaceted deleterious effects of child food poverty, on physical health, cognitive development, emotional well-being, and societal impacts and then try to formulate a road map to alleviate its deleterious effects.
Every day, right across the world, millions of parents and families are struggling to provide nutritious and diverse foods that young children desperately need to reach their full potential. Growing inequities, conflict, and climate crises, combined with rising food prices, the overabundance of unhealthy foods, harmful food marketing strategies and poor child-feeding practices, are condemning millions of children to child food poverty.
In a communique dated 06th June 2024, UNICEF reports that globally, 1 in 4 children; approximately 181 million under the age of five, live in severe child food poverty, defined as consuming at most, two of eight food groups in early childhood. These children are up to 50 per cent more likely to suffer from life-threatening malnutrition. Child Food Poverty: Nutrition Deprivation in Early Childhood – the third issue of UNICEF’s flagship Child Nutrition Report – highlights that millions of young children are unable to access and consume the nutritious and diverse diets that are essential for their growth and development in early childhood and beyond.
It is highlighted in the report that four out of five children experiencing severe child food poverty are fed only breastmilk or just some other milk and/or a starchy staple, such as maize, rice or wheat. Less than 10 per cent of these children are fed fruits and vegetables and less than 5 per cent are fed nutrient-dense foods such as eggs, fish, poultry, or meat. These are horrendous statistics that should pull at the heartstrings of the discerning populace of this world.
The report also identifies the drivers of child food poverty. Strikingly, though 46 per cent of all cases of severe child food poverty are among poor households where income poverty is likely to be a major driver, 54 per cent live in relatively wealthier households, among whom poor food environments and feeding practices are the main drivers of food poverty in early childhood.
One of the most immediate and visible effects of child food poverty is its detrimental impact on physical health. Malnutrition, which can result from both insufficient calorie intake and lack of essential nutrients, is a prevalent consequence. Chronic undernourishment during formative years leads to stunted growth, weakened immune systems, and increased susceptibility to infections and diseases. Children who do not receive adequate nutrition are more likely to suffer from conditions such as anaemia, rickets, and developmental delays.
Moreover, the lack of proper nutrition can have long-term health consequences. Malnourished children are at a higher risk of developing chronic illnesses such as heart disease, diabetes, and obesity later in life. The paradox of child food poverty is that it can lead to both undernutrition and overnutrition, with children in food-insecure households often consuming calorie-dense but nutrient-poor foods due to economic constraints. This dietary pattern increases the risk of obesity, creating a vicious cycle of poor health outcomes.
The impacts of child food poverty extend beyond physical health, severely affecting cognitive development and educational attainment. Adequate nutrition is crucial for brain development, particularly in the early years of life. Malnutrition can impair cognitive functions such as attention, memory, and problem-solving skills. Studies have consistently shown that malnourished children perform worse academically compared to their well-nourished peers. Inadequate nutrition during early childhood can lead to reduced school readiness and lower IQ scores. These children often struggle to concentrate in school, miss more days due to illness, and have lower overall academic performance. This educational disadvantage perpetuates the cycle of poverty, as lower educational attainment reduces future employment opportunities and earning potential.
The emotional and psychological effects of child food poverty are profound and are often overlooked. Food insecurity creates a constant state of stress and anxiety for both children and their families. The uncertainty of not knowing when or where the next meal will come from can lead to feelings of helplessness and despair. Children in food-insecure households are more likely to experience behavioural problems, including hyperactivity, aggression, and withdrawal. The stigma associated with poverty and hunger can further exacerbate these emotional challenges. Children who experience food poverty may feel shame and embarrassment, leading to social isolation and reduced self-esteem. This psychological toll can have lasting effects, contributing to mental health issues such as depression and anxiety in adolescence and adulthood.
Child food poverty also perpetuates cycles of poverty and inequality. Children who grow up in food-insecure households are more likely to remain in poverty as adults, continuing the intergenerational transmission of disadvantage. This cycle of poverty exacerbates social disparities, contributing to increased crime rates, reduced social cohesion, and greater reliance on social welfare programmes. The repercussions of child food poverty ripple through society, creating economic and social challenges that affect everyone. The healthcare costs associated with treating malnutrition-related illnesses and chronic diseases are substantial. Additionally, the educational deficits linked to child food poverty result in a less skilled workforce, which hampers economic growth and productivity.
Addressing child food poverty requires a multi-faceted approach that tackles both immediate needs and underlying causes. Policy interventions are crucial in ensuring that all children have access to adequate nutrition. This can include expanding social safety nets, such as food assistance programmes and school meal initiatives, as well as targeted manoeuvres to reach more vulnerable families. Ensuring that these programmes are adequately funded and effectively implemented is essential for their success.
In addition to direct food assistance, broader economic and social policies are needed to address the root causes of poverty. This includes efforts to increase household incomes through living wage policies, job training programs, and economic development initiatives. Supporting families with affordable childcare, healthcare, and housing can also alleviate some of the financial pressures that contribute to food insecurity.
Community-based initiatives play a vital role in combating child food poverty. Local food banks, community gardens, and nutrition education programmes can help provide immediate relief and promote long-term food security. Collaborative efforts between government, non-profits, and the private sector are necessary to create sustainable solutions.
Child food poverty is a profound and inescapable issue with far-reaching consequences. Its deleterious effects on physical health, cognitive development, emotional well-being, and societal stability underscore the urgent need for comprehensive action. As we strive for a more equitable and just world, addressing child food poverty must be a priority. By ensuring that all children have access to adequate nutrition, we can lay the foundation for a healthier, more prosperous future for individuals and society as a whole. The fight against child food poverty is not just a moral imperative but an investment in our collective future. Healthy, well-nourished children are more likely to grow into productive, contributing members of society. The benefits of addressing this issue extend beyond individual well-being, enhancing economic stability and social harmony. It is incumbent upon us all to recognize and act upon the understanding that every child deserves the right to adequate nutrition and the opportunity to thrive.
Despite all of these existent challenges, it is very definitely possible to end child food poverty. The world needs targeted interventions to transform food, health, and social protection systems, and also take steps to strengthen data systems to track progress in reducing child food poverty. All these manoeuvres must comprise a concerted effort towards making nutritious and diverse diets accessible and affordable to all. We need to call for child food poverty reduction to be recognized as a metric of success towards achieving global and national nutrition and development goals.
Material from UNICEF reports and AI assistance are acknowledged.
Opinion
Do opinion polls matter?
By Dr Upul Wijayawardhana
The colossal failure of not a single opinion poll predicting accurately the result of the Indian parliamentary election, the greatest exercise in democracy in the world, raises the question whether the importance of opinion polls is vastly exaggerated. During elections two types of opinion polls are conducted; one based on intentions to vote, published during or before the campaign, often being not very accurate as these are subject to many variables but exit polls, done after the voting where a sample tally of how the voters actually voted, are mostly accurate. However, of the 15 exit polls published soon after all the votes were cast in the massive Indian election, 13 vastly overpredicted the number of seats Modi’s BJP led coalition NDA would obtain, some giving a figure as high as 400, the number Modi claimed he is aiming for. The other two polls grossly underestimated predicting a hung parliament. The actual result is that NDA passed the threshold of 272 comfortably, there being no landslide. BJP by itself was not able to cross the threshold, a significant setback for an overconfident Mody! Whether this would result in less excesses on the part of Modi, like Muslim-bashing, remains to be seen. Anyway, the statement issued by BJP that they would be investigating the reasons for failure rather than blaming the process speaks very highly of the maturity of the democratic process in India.
I was intrigued by this failure of opinion polls as this differs dramatically from opinion polls in the UK. I never failed to watch ‘Election night specials’ on BBC; as the Big Ben strikes ‘ten’ (In the UK polls close at 10pm} the anchor comes out with “Exit polls predict that …” and the actual outcome is often almost as predicted. However, many a time opinion polls conducted during the campaign have got the predictions wrong. There are many explanations for this.
An opinion poll is defined as a research survey of public opinion from a particular sample, the origin of which can be traced back to the 1824 US presidential election, when two local newspapers in North Carolina and Delaware predicted the victory of Andrew Jackson but the sample was local. First national survey was done in 1916 by the magazine, Literary Digest, partly for circulation-raising, by mailing millions of postcards and counting the returns. Of course, this was not very scientific though it accurately predicted the election of Woodrow Wilson.
Since then, opinion polls have grown in extent and complexity with scientific methodology improving the outcome of predictions not only in elections but also in market research. As a result, some of these organisations have become big businesses. For instance, YouGov, an internet-based organisation co-founded by the Iraqi-born British politician Nadim Zahawi, based in London had a revenue of 258 million GBP in 2023.
In Sri Lanka, opinion polls seem to be conducted by only one organisation which, by itself, is a disadvantage, as pooled data from surveys conducted by many are more likely to reflect the true situation. Irrespective of the degree of accuracy, politicians seem to be dependent on the available data which lend explanations to the behaviour of some.
The Institute for Health Policy’s (IHP) Sri Lanka Opinion Tracker Survey has been tracking the voting intentions for the likely candidates for the Presidential election. At one stage the NPP/JVP leader AKD was getting a figure over 50%. This together with some degree of international acceptance made the JVP behave as if they are already in power, leading to some incidents where their true colour was showing.
The comments made by a prominent member of the JVP who claimed that the JVP killed only the riff-raff, raised many questions, in addition to being a total insult to many innocents killed by them including my uncle. Do they have the authority to do so? Do extra-judicial killings continue to be JVP policy? Do they consider anyone who disagrees with them riff-raff? Will they kill them simply because they do not comply like one of my admired teachers, Dr Gladys Jayawardena who was considered riff-raff because she, as the Chairman of the State Pharmaceutical Corporation, arranged to buy drugs cheaper from India? Is it not the height of hypocrisy that AKD is now boasting of his ties to India?
Another big-wig comes with the grand idea of devolving law and order to village level. As stated very strongly, in the editorial “Pledges and reality” (The Island, 20 May) is this what they intend to do: Have JVP kangaroo-courts!
Perhaps, as a result of these incidents AKD’s ratings has dropped to 39%, according to the IHP survey done in April, and Sajith Premadasa’s ratings have increased gradually to match that. Whilst they are level pegging Ranil is far behind at 13%. Is this the reason why Ranil is getting his acolytes to propagate the idea that the best for the country is to extend his tenure by a referendum? He forced the postponement of Local Governments elections by refusing to release funds but he cannot do so for the presidential election for constitutional reasons. He is now looking for loopholes. Has he considered the distinct possibility that the referendum to extend the life of the presidency and the parliament if lost, would double the expenditure?
Unfortunately, this has been an exercise in futility and it would not be surprising if the next survey shows Ranil’s chances dropping even further! Perhaps, the best option available to Ranil is to retire gracefully, taking credit for steadying the economy and saving the country from an anarchic invasion of the parliament, rather than to leave politics in disgrace by coming third in the presidential election. Unless, of course, he is convinced that opinion polls do not matter and what matters is the ballots in the box!
Opinion
Thoughtfulness or mindfulness?
By Prof. Kirthi Tennakone
ktenna@yahoo.co.uk
Thoughtfulness is the quality of being conscious of issues that arise and considering action while seeking explanations. It facilitates finding solutions to problems and judging experiences.
Almost all human accomplishments are consequences of thoughtfulness.
Can you perform day-to-day work efficiently and effectively without being thoughtful? Obviously, no. Are there any major advancements attained without thought and contemplation? Not a single example!
Science and technology, art, music and literary compositions and religion stand conspicuously as products of thought.
Thought could have sinister motives and the only way to eliminate them is through thought itself. Thought could distinguish right from wrong.
Empathy, love, amusement, and expression of sorrow are reflections of thought.
Thought relieves worries by understanding or taking decisive action.
Despite the universal virtue of thoughtfulness, some advocate an idea termed mindfulness, claiming the benefits of nurturing this quality to shape mental wellbeing. The concept is defined as focusing attention to the present moment without judgment. A way of forgetting the worries and calming the mind – a form of meditation. A definition coined in the West to decouple the concept from religion. The attitude could have a temporary advantage as a method of softening negative feelings such as sorrow and anger. However, no man or woman can afford to be non-judgmental all the time. It is incompatible with indispensable thoughtfulness! What is the advantage of diverting attention to one thing without discernment during a few tens of minute’s meditation? The instructors of mindfulness meditation tell you to focus attention on trivial things. Whereas in thoughtfulness, you concentrate the mind on challenging issues. Sometimes arriving at groundbreaking scientific discoveries, solution of mathematical problems or the creation of masterpieces in engineering, art, or literature.
The concept of meditation and mindfulness originated in ancient India around 1000 BCE. Vedic ascetics believed the practice would lead to supernatural powers enabling disclosure of the truth. Failing to meet the said aspiration, notwithstanding so many stories in scripture, is discernable. Otherwise, the world would have been awakened to advancement by ancient Indians before the Greeks. The latter culture emphasized thoughtfulness!
In India, Buddha was the first to deviate from the Vedic philosophy. His teachers, Alara Kalama and Uddaka Ramaputra, were adherents of meditation. Unconvinced of their approach, Buddha concluded a thoughtful analysis of the actualities of life should be the path to realisation. However, in an environment dominated by Vedic tradition, meditation residually persisted when Buddha’s teachings transformed into a religion.
In the early 1970s, a few in the West picked up meditation and mindfulness. We Easterners, who criticize Western ideas all the time, got exalted after seeing something Eastern accepted in the Western circles. Thereafter, Easterners took up the subject more seriously, in the spirit of its definition in the West.
Today, mindfulness has become a marketable commodity – a thriving business spreading worldwide, fueled largely by advertising. There are practice centres, lessons onsite and online, and apps for purchase. Articles written by gurus of the field appear on the web.
What attracts people to mindfulness programmes? Many assume them being stressed and depressed needs to improve their mental capacity. In most instances, these are minor complaints and for understandable reasons, they do not seek mainstream medical interventions but go for exaggeratedly advertised alternatives. Mainstream medical treatments are based on rigorous science and spell out both the pros and cons of the procedure, avoiding overstatement. Whereas the alternative sector makes unsubstantiated claims about the efficacy and effectiveness of the treatment.
Advocates of mindfulness claim the benefits of their prescriptions have been proven scientifically. There are reports (mostly in open-access journals which charge a fee for publication) indicating that authors have found positive aspects of mindfulness or identified reasons correlating the efficacy of such activities. However, they rarely meet standards normally required for unequivocal acceptance. The gold standard of scientific scrutiny is the statistically significant reproducibility of claims.
If a mindfulness guru claims his prescription of meditation cures hypertension, he must record the blood pressure of participants before and after completion of the activity and show the blood pressure of a large percentage has stably dropped and repeat the experiment with different clients. He must also conduct sessions where he adopts another prescription (a placebo) under the same conditions and compares the results. This is not enough, he must request someone else to conduct sessions following his prescription, to rule out the influence of the personality of the instructor.
The laity unaware of the above rigid requirements, accede to purported claims of mindfulness proponents.
A few years ago, an article published and widely cited stated that the practice of mindfulness increases the gray matter density of the brain. A more recent study found there is no such correlation. Popular expositions on the subject do not refer to the latter report. Most mindfulness research published seems to have been conducted intending to prove the benefits of the practice. The hard science demands doing the opposite as well-experiments carried out intending to disprove the claims. You need to be skeptical until things are firmly established.
Despite many efforts diverted to disprove Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity, no contradictions have been found in vain to date, strengthening the validity of the theory. Regarding mindfulness, as it stands, benefits can neither be proved nor disproved, to the gold standard of scientific scrutiny.
Some schools in foreign lands have accommodated mindfulness training programs hoping to develop the mental facility of students and Sri Lanka plans to follow. However, studies also reveal these exercises are ineffective or do more harm than good. Have we investigated this issue before imitation?
Should we force our children to focus attention on one single goal without judgment, even for a moment?
Why not allow young minds to roam wild in their deepest imagination and build castles in the air and encourage them to turn these fantasies into realities by nurturing their thoughtfulness?
Be more thoughtful than mindful?