Columns

So 100 days have come and gone. There are of course those who will say aye but not yet gone as the soothsayer told Caesar. The day is not done and there is still time, diehards will insist, saying that had all sides in parliament cooperated then the 100-day programme would have been done and dusted.

One thing can be said for that soothsayer who foretold correctly that the ides of March will spell trouble for Caesar. As it happened he was stabbed in the back (Caesar that is, not the soothsayer) by friend and foe alike. Fortunately (or unfortunately as the case may be) that soothsayer proved far more accurate than Mahinda Rajapaksa’s own star gazer who predicted he would win the presidential poll.

The problem was that Caesar did not take the soothsayer seriously while Mahinda Rajapaksa did, relying heavily on the man’s predictions, if all the tales circulating before and after the elections are true. Thankfully Rajapaksa’s forecaster has retreated into the shrubs or wherever, probably to discover what the stars have to say about him.

One does not have to be an assiduous student of Shakespeare to recall this well-known scene from his play Julius Caesar for it has featured on stage and screen many a time. The moral of the story is that even if you do not take your astrologers seriously it is good to watch your back, particularly if you are a politician.

The other lesson, especially if you are a powerful politician or one determined to get right up the totem pole, is to watch those near and even dear to you more closely than you watch your opponents and foes.

The other day I read somewhere that Mahinda Rajapaksa had said that he was stabbed in the back (metaphorically no doubt as he has not suffered injury except perhaps to his reputation) by his security chief and his “tea taster”, meaning I suppose the chap who tastes the food and drink served to the then president before consumption just to make sure bottled water is really water and contains nothing else, though one can never be certain of its purity these days.

Now one never knows whether this is true or not but it would be extremely prudent to keep a watchful eye on those who hover around you, never mind whether it is on official work or in supplication.

Back stabbing is an art that has been practised over the centuries as the Caesarian assassination well portrays. It is perhaps even more prevalent today in Sri Lanka where it is difficult to fathom who is what or where.

Never in the independent history of this country has it ever happened that our citizenry that set forth on that January day to cast their precious ballot could not distinguish the government from the opposition.

One only has to look at the confusion and the allegations being thrown around like confetti at a wedding, even by those that came together late last year with the declared intention of ousting what they clearly called a corrupt and authoritarian administration and promising to govern fairly and justly.

Before long those who had got together for this supreme purpose were reaching for each other’s jugular and accusations of back-stabbing were flung making ‘palanaya’ itself problematic, never mind whether it was ‘yaha’ and just.

Those who so vociferously decried nepotism and “family bandyism” (a phrase that entered the political lexicon during the days of Sirima Bandaranaike) had no qualms about sneaking a relative or two into this board or that, into this corporation or that. And when it came to planting friends and schoolmates in places of importance like chairmanships and chief executive positions in state ventures, why all those high-principles were discarded like left-over meals on SriLankan Airlines.

I am no soothsayer like the one that warned Caesar but talking of SriLankan Airlines there will surely come a time when airline employees will get calls to upgrade friends and family to vacant business class seats or ask that a flight be delayed for late arrivals. These things will never go away, believe me, just like some of the business deals done that have been referred to in reports and other fora.

It is surely in the last 100 days that we have had remarks by a minister contradicted by a deputy of another ministry or vice versa. Or even a cabinet spokesman who, during media briefings, seeks to venture beyond what the Cabinet has decided or said and tell tales out of school.
When has this country ever faced a situation where the opposition does not accept the leader of the opposition and the leader of the opposition does not know whether what he proposes or says is acceptable to the opposition which, in any case, are opting for somebody else to lead the pack.
When has it ever happened that some 90 MPs or more would spend the night sleeping on the floor of the parliament chamber having enjoyed (I hope) fried rice and devilled chicken, string hoppers and pol sambol and assorted foods to satiate their hungry bellies (some expanded beyond recognition from the time they were first espied in parliament) if not to salve their conscience.

Among those who decided to lie on the floor of the House — I mean lie down not tell lies — was, I believe, that one-time revolutionary, the loquacious Wimal Weerawansa who, if I remember correctly, was once lying opposite the UN office and engaged in a fast, only to be rescued by President Rajapaksa with a glass of water. But on this occasion perhaps Mr. Weerawansa thought that some fried rice and chicken under his belt might be a better option in the absence of TV cameras to record his every move.

Perhaps Carlton Sports channel might have been allowed to do some shooting inside given that all this sleeping around on the floor that they usually walk on, seemed like some political game. Seriously, none of those who slept there has offered a credible explanation as to what the Speaker and parliament have to do with the Bribery Commission’s interest in recording whatever statement it required of Mahinda Rajapaksa and Gotabhaya Rajapaksa.

As far as we know neither of them is an MP at present, be they of the government, the quasi- opposition or the real opposition. So they do not enjoy the privileges of MPs. Therefore I would imagine the conventional practice that the Speaker is informed before hand of the impending arrest of an MP or his/her questioning by a state authority with the powers to do so, would not apply.

It would help those like me and surely thousands and thousands of others who are equally confused by all this, if somebody in the government or an MP who spent his or her night on the floor instead of their comfortable beds at home explained the pros and cons as it were, of the legitimacy of it all.

Meanwhile it would be nice if there is a countrywide vote to extend the 100 days by another 100 days. After all there is work to be done, laws to pass and crooks to catch no? And so much fun too.