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, March 31, 2013
Recognising Ourselves As Our Worst Enemies
By Kishali
Pinto-Jayawardena -March 30, 2013 |
With a foreign policy in
tatters, the judiciary and the legal system in deep crisis and the state of the
economy looking more perilous with each monumentally wasteful government
extravaganza, the seasonal call of the koha heralding the Sinhala and Tamil New
Year sounds more eerily mocking than musical.
Racist
extremism has no boundaries
On
the domestic front, a superficial bubble of postwar development waits in
suspense as it were, to be pricked by the sharp pin of anti-minority extremism
at the hands of militant Sinhala
Buddhist forces implicitly protected by powerful government figures.
The latest target of such extremist forces is the Muslim community.
If Muslim politicians, professionals and business leaders believed that they
would be spared from the tide of racist extremism evidenced against the Tamil community,
this was the year of reckoning.
It
was, of course, sheer foolishness to believe that extremism will rage against
one minority and stop short at the boundaries of another. The rationale that
Muslim nations supported Sri Lanka even against a West (as is sought to be told
by the government’s favourite storytellers) intent on taking revenge against the
country and that therefore, the Muslim community within the country would be
spared the evils of extremist violence, was soon proved to be quite wrong.
On
the international front meanwhile, Sri Lanka is more isolated than at any other
point since independence, with this government placing excellent weapons of
attack into the hands of the pro-LTTE
diaspora. In sum, not a happy recipe, one would reckon for New Year
cheers.
Do
we realise the importance of institutions?
Yet
now more than at any other point, as Christians celebrate
Easter and Sinhalese along with Tamils prepare themselves for the traditional
Avurudu, thoughtful introspection is needed. This process involves the far more
difficult task of shifting the target of criticism away from Sri Lanka’s
political leaders towards ourselves. This column has (for a decade and a half)
been consistently focusing on the importance of protecting institutions from the
illintentioned attacks of politicians temporarily in power. Yet it is a
pertinent question as to whether the sanctity of institutions are actually
recognised or acknowledged in the public perception as vital to the functioning
of the country.
The
judicial institution of Sri Lanka is a case in point. This week, the
report of a remote mission of the Human Rights Institute of the
International Bar Association was released roundly condemning the impeachment of
the43rd
Chief Justice of Sri Lanka and calling upon Sri Lanka to reverse the
process.
This
is the third report of the IBAHRI conducted by remote mission due to the refusal
of visas to its members as contrasted to its earlier missions conducted in
response to allegations of abuse of judicial power during the Sarath Silva Court
(1999-2009). The severity of the report, justified as this is by the severity of
the ousting of a sitting Chief Justice by military muscle, will lend its own
weight to Sri Lanka’s exponentially growing international isolation.
The
importance of a ‘non-politicised’ focus
That
said, some positive signs do appear despite the gloom. This coming month, the
Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) will embark on a new term under the
Presidency of Upul
Jayasuriya who, (unlike many other lawyers suddenly possessing a
conscience only from December 2012), was as outspoken during that unsettling
decade of the Silva Court as he is now.
His
address on Saturday to the legal community took detailed note of the
tremendous challenges before the BASL, reflected on public criticisms made
thereto and promised strong and consistent ‘non-politicised activism’ in
response. And the gauntlet was thrown down in no uncertain terms by the fact
that an invitation was not issued to the 44th
Chief Justice to attend the convocation as Chief Guest and indeed by
the attendance of the 43rd Chief Justice at the ceremony.
Substantively,
the emphasis on a ‘non-politicised’ focus in the BASL convocation address is
immeasurably important. The struggle needs to be against political fronts of
whatever colour. The manner in which Sri Lanka’s judicial institution was
reduced to a pale shadow of a once proud precedent setting body respected in the
Commonwealth is a clear illustration.
The
sins committed by the administrations of Chandrika
Kumaratunga and Mahinda
Rajapaksa in respect to the country’s judiciary are well understood
in the public mind. Yet a lesser known question is why the United National Front
(UNF) administration did not live up to campaign promises during its brief
tenure in office (2001-2003) in regard to correction of the (alleged) abuse of
judicial power by an incumbent Chief Justice?
The
answer to that question is simple. The UNF fell into the beguiling trap of
believing that a Chief Justice amenable to a government in power would be useful
rather than a Chief Justice who would fearlessly stand up for the rule of law
against any government. In that sense, the late Justice Mark Fernando, known as
one of Sri Lanka’s most erudite and honest judges, was disliked if not feared by
both the UPFA of Chandrika Kumaratunga and the UNP/UNF of Ranil
Wickremesinghe. We hearken back therefore to the importance of the
struggle to preserve institutions against politicians of all colour.
Failing
ourselves and vicious personal attacks
Indeed
neither was this process owing only to the peccadilloes of politicians. Rather,
the lack of courage of Sri Lanka’s legal community to speak out at that time
sealed the fate of the Sri Lankan judiciary and years later, led to a sitting
Chief Justice being abused by politicians. If not for our abject failures then,
we would not have had to suffer such a calamitous fate now. The BASL faces
therefore a formidable task in reversing the cumulative effect of this decade
long slide into disaster.
Another
case in point is the equally beleaguered state of university administration in
Sri Lanka. While space prevents a detailed exploration of the relevant issues,
it is an apt reflection that when measured critiques are made in the specific
context of heavily contested appointments to the office of the Vice Chancellor
of the University of Colombo (see ‘The
Collapse of Institutions’, Savitri
Goonesekere, Colombo Telegraph, March 17, 2013), these critiques are
met with vicious personal attacks.
What
are we as a nation?
One
would fairly question whether the fault lies verily not in our politicians but
in ourselves as a people? True enough, politicians take deservedly a great deal
of the blame for our current sorry state. But a larger question needs to be
directed to ourselves; are our politicians and our political culture not a
reflection of ourselves? If so, what does that say for us as a nation? Is there
indeed, any entity that truly can be called a Sri Lankan nation?
These
are good questions for those of us at least possessing a degree of objectivity
and basic decency to ask each other.