When Politicians Fail: Politics, Power & Morality

By Siri Gamage –DECEMBER 29, 2018

Dr. Siri Gamage

Politically acquired power is dominant in countries like Sri Lanka even going beyond the sphere of governance to the extent of claiming exclusive rights and privileges in the name of representative democracy. There is a lot of unhappiness among well-meaning Sri Lankans of all ranks about the current state of play in the political arena. Democratic system of governance and associated institutions have been diluted over the decades by introducing an executive President, politicisation of institutions and tampering with the constitution. The safeguards that average citizens can expect from a text book parliamentary democracy are not in existence. Politics as a means for acquiring power to govern have become extremely antagonistic and acquired power by the elected politicians is not utilised for the benefit of many.

In this context, we need to look for another force that can guide the country out of the mess that have been created collectively by our political leaders since independence. In my view, this force is none other than the moral force already existing in the broader society in various forms. As the Buddhist monks in ALUTH PARLIMENTUVA (26.12.2018) argue, the religious leaders may be called upon to organise a liberatory national movement without succumbing to further political pressure. After all, the moral order in societies like Sri Lanka with a history of culture, civilisation, religious pluralism is much stronger than the political order which is subject to various divisions, distortions, upheavals and conflicts. When politicians fail, moral power has to be invoked collectively to become a force for positive change.

The best example of a moral leader making demands and commitments from political leaders and parties in Sri Lanka in recent times comes from the role played by Rev. Maduluwawe Sobitha (1942-2015) and his National Movement for Social Justice before the 2015 Presidential election. At the time, political leaders of various colours visited Naga Viharaya day and night to obtain his blessings for the party or coalition they represented. Rev. Sobitha had a blueprint for good governance. He did not deviate from it when meeting different political leaders. He occupied the moral high ground in a country where the corrupt political culture had eaten into the core of body politic. It was beginning to impact on the moral order as well. Unfortunately, before he demanded accountability and transparency in government decisions in accordance with his blueprint for which present leaders made commitments, he passed away. This was the misfortune of the people and country. Had he lived this long, perhaps we may not have witnessed a bond scam. Punishments for corrupt behaviour of elected and public officials in the previous regime would have been meted out. Ruling class, instead of serving themselves once in power, would have been made to understand that their prime responsibility is to serve the people at large. Executive Presidency would have been abolished. In its place, a more representative democratic parliamentary system of governance would have been installed. Most of all he and his organisation would have been able to keep an eagle eye on any deviations from the commitments made in the name of Yahapalanaya.

Unlike in some other countries such as Cambodia, since democratic and solidarity space for change is not completely overtaken by the state and/or governing political parties, even today initiatives of such nature shown by Sobitha phenomenon have the potential to occupy the third space over and above mainstream political coalitions formed to acquire and retain state power in order to bring about much desired positive change in governance with a humanistic slant.

Politics of Disunity, Self Interest and Privilege

Already, there is enough criticism of the existing political culture and behaviour of elected politicians. This has been the case for decades. Criticism alone is not going to deliver the anticipated results in terms of Yahapalanaya if we rely on the existing ruling class itself. We need to look beyond. The ruling class has been transformed in the last few decades, especially after the introduction of Provincial Council system in 1987. Layers of politicians from lower socio-economic classes, with low education and poor moral convictions have entered the field of politics from the provinces. Some of them have entered national politics and national government also. Thus, the composition of national parliament today is quite different to what it was during the time of Dudley Senanayake, N.M.Perera or Colvin R de Silva etc. Instead of a house of debate, disciplined critique, consultation and compromise for the national interest, it has become a place of petty rivalry, division, pseudo heroism and conflict.

What we have witnessed in the last few months, especially after October 26th, 2018, highlights the importance of power in controlling the lives of people, institutions, public revenue, and how conflicts among those holding formal power in the ruling class can lead a country to a very chaotic situation. Formal power is acquired by leaders of political parties during elections that are colourfully conducted with grand shows, advertising, manipulation of media to galvanise support from the party hierarchies spreading into rural hinterland. Political parties are the vehicle on which leaders of parties gain formal power. Before, during and after elections politics within such parties and outside involve a lot of horse trading, promises, commitments (public and private) by the leaders. No one in the right mind will engage in party politics merely for symbolic purposes –though this cannot be completely ruled out at the grass roots level where party symbols have made some individuals and families lifelong supporters irrespective of what the party offers them after the elections

Read More