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 23, 2017
Sri Lanka: Forgotten legacy of Sobitha Thero
( July 23, 2017, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Even
the invocation of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony (Ode to Joy) in the
opinion letters published in The Island last week was hardly going to
moderate the shouting match that the constitutional reform process is
turning out to be. There are no symphonies, only cacophonies of
intemperate tone and temper that are beginning to fill up the media in
opposition to the proposed constitutional changes. The unity government
itself is divided on the scope of the constitutional changes. The two
parties to the government, the UNP and the SLFP, which were united
specifically to consolidate the requisite two-thirds majority in
parliament, are divided over whether or not to go so far with changes as
to require a referendum. Interestingly, may be not surprisingly, even
the Joint Opposition has come disjointed on the constitutional question.
Wimal Weerawansa and his National Freedom Front have decided not to
further participate in the constitutional process, but the Rajapaksas
and the rest of the JO have decided to stay on if only to see what
mischief the UNP might be up to. The so called Leftists in the JO are
also reportedly against boycotting the process as it would only alienate
the minorities. Last, but not least, the TNA is back to its old refrain
that the UNP and the SLFP must unite to reform the constitution. Easier
said than done, even though what is said and what is to be done are
quite obvious.
Much of the cacophony, however, is coming from outside parliament
because there is nothing continuously going on in parliament on the
constitution. The intervention of the Sangha has created a very
non-agnostic distraction, the insistent certainty that no constitutional
change is needed. While this has triggered a whole debate on the role
of the Sangha, often more heated than enlightened, there has been a
surprising omission of one name that is so central to the project of
constitutional change – the name of Maduluwawe Sobitha Thero. It was
Sobitha Thero who almost single-handedly mobilized public opinion in
favour of constitutional change and created the momentum without which
Maithripala Sirisena would not have become President promising to
abolish the Executive Presidency, and Ranil Wickremesinghe would not
have become the de-facto executive Prime Minister. The two men renewed
their vows at the funeral of Sobitha Thero, and one would hope that the
two remain equally committed to living up to the legacy of the late
prelate.
How does the Sangha relate to the legacy of Sobitha Thero? Obviously,
not everyone in the Sangha would have agreed with Sobitha Thero’s
position on the constitution. But no one will disagree that there was no
alternative Sangha position that countered Sobitha Thero’s stand at the
January 2015 election. And the Thero’s call for constitutional change
was one of the two cardinal premises on which that election was decided.
The other of course was the call to expose and end corruption. Two
years are a long time in politics and it may be that those in the higher
echelons of the Sangha do not think much anymore about Sobitha Thero’s
legacy, but it seems odd and strange that while ignoring Sobitha Thero
one could also endorse someone like Galagoda Atte Gnanasara Thero of BBS
notoriety. Let the legacy of Sobitha Thero suffer political injury, if
it must, but does it deserve ex cathedra insult as well? That is a
question that is best left to the organized supporters of Sobitha Thero
to deal with.
Time will tell
Of course, the political blame is ultimately with the government. To my
mind, the government made both strategic and tactical mistakes on the
constitutional file. The government should have known that the ultimate
Achilles Heel for any constitutional change was going to be not the
Tamils and Muslims in Sri Lanka, not the Tamil Diaspora, or not even
India or the West (or what is left of it after Donald Trump) – but the
Sinhalese and the Sri Lankan south. While a whole lot of energy and
resources were spent on consulting with the converted and developing
constitutional details, proportionately insufficient effort was made in
the south to maintain the momentum that was created in January 2015.
When it comes to securing public acceptance of constitutional change or
reform, the devil is not so much in the details as it is in the broad
outline of change that resonates with the public mood.
There have been reports that the TNA leader, R. Sampanthan, was going to
seek the audience of the Mahanayakas to make his plea for
constitutional change. It is unfortunate that such efforts were not made
earlier. NPC Chief Minister CV Wigneswaran in a recent press interview
has blamed the TNA leadership and Parliamentarians for their inability
to get across their message to the Sinhalese people. In the same
interview, Mr. Wigneswaran has rejected the idea of a separate state.
Perhaps, the TNA leadership could involve the Chief Minister to be their
interlocutor in the south. Such a move would also positively isolate
the Chief Minister from mischief makers in the north.
It is also inexplicable, or perhaps not, that the President and Prime
Minister were not focused on keeping the Mahanayakas and the Sangha
informed of the need for and the government’s plans to, reform the
constitution. This failure is attributable, on the one hand, to the
general inability of this government to target and address risks and
problem areas promptly and consistently without letting them morph and
magnify into unmanageable challenges. On the other hand, and more
importantly, the government’s ethical flaws and lapses have hugely
eroded the credibility that the people invested in it in January and
August 2015. Unless these flaws are addressed and lapses reversed, the
government cannot make a moral claim for implementing constitutional
reform.
On the more practical side, the President and the Prime Minister are
increasingly drifting apart on critical issues. And nothing is more
critical than the constitution and corruption investigations. The
President and the Prime Minister are giving marching orders to their
respective parties to prepare not only for the overdue local government
elections and upcoming provincial elections, but also for the next
presidential and parliamentary elections. It is disappointing, if not
betraying, that the President and the Prime Minister are not thinking
about honouring the promises they made to the people in 2015, but are
planning to win elections that are not due till 2019 and 2020. They were
not elected in 2015 to prepare for the next election but to fulfill the
mandate they were given before the next election. As things stand, they
have little to show on the two critical files.
In December 2015, following Prime Minister Wickremesinghe’s Sujata
Jayawardena Memorial Lecture in which he outlined the constitutional
changes that the government was planning, I speculated in my Sunday
column that time will tell whether the Prime Minister’s 2015 lecture
will become a historical companion to JR Jayewardene’s 1966 lecture to
the Ceylon Association for the Advancement of Science, and Dr. Colvin R.
de Silva’s 1969 talk before the Socialist Study Circle at the CISIR
auditorium. I wrote with much optimism, but developments since that time
have done much to wash away that optimism. I can only hope that I was
right then and I am wrong now. Time will tell.