A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Sunday, July 9, 2017
Sovereignty & Sangha: Island Without Democracy
Citizens
enable the modern democratic State. With all its highs and lows and the
complexity, democracy enables citizens to actively participate in the
process of governing. Although democratic system allows citizens to
actively participate in the governing process, it is up to the citizens
to take that decision whether to participate in the governing or not.
While social, political and economic ignorance of people can lead them
to elect representatives who are incapable of representing citizens of
the country and making accurate decisions, shallow identities created by
the neo-liberal economic policies play a major role in democracy making
the ‘ethno-religious’ majority powerful. While it is a given fact that
democracy has its own structural weaknesses, citizens should be able to
deal with it and expand the horizons of democracy. The relationship
between the citizens and their representatives locate a legal system
which enables sovereignty of the country.
According
to Giorgio Agamben sovereignty is a paradox which plays outside the
legal system of the country and at the same time proclaims that there is
nothing outside the legal system (Agamben, G., (1998), Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, Stanford University Press). Thus, the complexity of the phenomena should be dealt with carefully as otherwise it would lead to the insidious abuse of power.
Due to its
paradoxical nature, sovereignty is influenced by many external factors
and could present the ‘unfair’ legal system as ‘fair’ and ‘just’.
According to the Article 9 of Sri Lankan Constitution, ‘The
Republic of Sri Lanka shall give to Buddhism the foremost place and
accordingly it shall be the duty of the State to protect and foster the
Buddha Sasana, while assuring to all religions the rights granted by
Articles 10 and 14(1) (e)’. The law of the country itself make distance minorities from the State as equal citizens. The
status of second level citizenship is established through the law of
the country. By giving the foremost place to Buddhism, the state which
is responsible for its citizen’s protection discriminate against the
minority ethno-religious groups who are also citizens of the country.
The article 9 of the Constitution provides an invisible power to
Buddhist religious institutions, which can be used to damage the
sovereignty of the country. The relationship between the citizens and
their representatives can be interfered by Buddhist religious
institution without any obstruction or limitation from the State or
otherwise, the interference is rather encouraged through the
constitution itself.
The recent statements by the Mahanayake of
Asgiriya Chapter, earlier on how the Government should and should not
perform the law and recently on constitutional reforms were disturbing.
In the earlier statement, Mahanayakes’ focus on activities of minorities
against Sinhala-Buddhist majority and the silence of the Government on
those activities. Further, they states that, although they do not
approve the aggressive behavior and speech of the Bhikku Galagoda Atte Gnanasara, the viewpoint expressed by him cannot be discarded. The Mahanayakes’ of Asgiriya chapter
do not criticize Gnanasara Thero for taking law into his own hands. How
one can separate behavior and ideology is a problem. Is not it possible
for Gnanasara Thero to solve the problems he has through the law of the
country other than provoking violence among ethno-religious groups
against each other. The frustrating factor is that, Mahanayake Theros
are in denial or pretend to be in denial of the violent behaviors of Gnanasara Thero. One could envisage what
would happen if any minority group attacked a Buddhist temple. Would it
there be silence or are we as ‘Sinhala-Buddhist’ majority with the foremost place offered to the Buddhism in the constitution going
to overlook the attack. Taking the law into his own hands by Gnanasara
Thero was normalized or neutralized by the Maha Sangha of Asgiri chapter
by indirectly agreeing to the ideology of Gnanasara Thero.
If
the Mahanayakes’ of Asgiriya Chapter accept the fact that Gnasara Thero
is mis-behaving, Mahanayakes’ should have responded and taken
appropriate action against Gnanasara Thero, as the most responsible and
accountable groups of Buddhist religious authority in the country.
Mahanayake
of Asgiri Chapter recently made a statement saying that, Sri Lanka is
in no need of a new constitution. Two reasons were highlighted in
support of the statement; it is unnecessary to reform the constitution
at this hour and if there is any reform, foremost place should be
accorded to Buddhism, the unitary character of the country should be
retained, and the executive powers of the president should not be
scrapped. The irony lies in the fact that, the statement itself is
powered by the existing law on offering foremost place to Buddhism
and the statement seeks Government not to reform the article, which in
otherwise seeking of power to make similar statements and interference
regarding Governing of the island in the future.
Buddhist religious institutions are not elected through votes of the citizens to advice the state. Thus, Buddhist religious institutions are
not over the citizen’s power to represent the state. Further, religious
interference in Governing is normalized in the mind of the people, as
it is legitimized by the Constitution as well. Citizens of the country
belong to various ethno-religious groups and could not be limited or
reduced to Sinhala-Buddhists. Although it is reduced to
Sinhala-Buddhists, they too represent different political views in the
elections and elect members to the parliament to represent their
political ideology. Against this background, the power held by the
citizen is immense in a democratic system and it should be secured.
However, in Sri Lanka, this power is interfered by Buddhist religious
institutions. As Asgiriya Chapter is considered as the most important
authority in Sri Lankan Buddhist religious institutions, the power it
holds to influence State decisions is immense. Other than the direct
impact on the State, the power Asgiriya Chapter holds to influence the
Sinhala-Buddhist majority is irresistible.
The Buddhist clergy makes statement to prevent
the Government from reforming the constitution. The Mahanayakes’ of
Asgiriya Chapter claim that reforming the constitution of the country is
not the top priority at the moment. The functioning of democracy is in
serious question. If the Mahanayakes’ of Asgiriya Chapter are to decide
what is good for the country or in other words, for the people, there
is no rational of having a democratically elected body of people’s
representatives to make decisions regarding the country. Buddhist monks
of Asgiriya Chapter is already well aware of what is better for the
people. Under this rationale, Sri Lankan politicians should resign from their positions and offer the ruling of the country to Mahanayakes’ of Asgiriya Chapter.