Letters to the Editor
View(s):Let’s send qualified people to Parliament and PCs
For too long we have witnessed the recurring, unprofessional conduct of many of our politicians, who make a mockery out of august assemblies such as the Provincial Councils and Parliament. The disillusioned voting public now crave for a decent, honest, ethical and principled set of politicians who will always place the country first.
Our voters have consistently exhibited a fifth sense in changing Governments. But with regard to the selection of candidates both the parties and voters have failed miserably. In this scenario, the simple alternative is to abolish the abominable ’Preference Voting’ (PV) system which is only an optional adjunct to the main Proportionate Representation (PR) system. This minute change will compel the parties to select and field their best teams of political professionals in ‘District-wise merit order’ instead of the existing alphabetical order. The parties themselves can muster their best District level teams to achieve the goals of the country as laid down in their ‘Party Election Manifestos’. Political parties should be legally required by the Elections Commission to introduce a robust, unbiased and transparent process of screening followed by a meticulously structured interview method to select their nominees. The screening criteria already set out by PAFFREL through the ‘All-Party March 12 declaration’ surely had a salutary effect on party nominations at the last General election. Now, it must be further strengthened and given legal teeth by the Elections Commission. I suggest the following methodology to achieve the objective.
1) Strengthen ‘Paffrel’ pre-interview criteria with the following additional requirements.
i) The applicant should have at least 2 passes in GCE (A.Level ) in not more than 3 sittings. (It is not a tall order in the present times.)
ii) Should possess at least one added professional qualification from a recognized professional body (even a Diploma would do)
iii) Should produce at the interview, a less than one month old good health record certified by a Registered Medical Practitioner. This can be updated on the nominations date.
iv) Should be below 75 years of age as at the last date for nominations.
v) Should furnish an Assets declaration as at the date of nomination.
2) Under the structured interview method, numerical values shall be adduced to ‘voter preferred traits’ such as multi-lingual skills, debating ability, social integration, political/ legal/ general knowledge, good moral character and acceptance to the society. Special weightage should be added to women caqndidates.
3) The basic screening and interview criteria should be published by the Elections Commission/Dept. well in advance of the date of nominations. Thereafter, parties can complete the screening and interview process; prepare their preliminary ‘District wise merit lists’ of candidates and publish them in at least one national newspaper in Sinhala, Tamil and English well in advance for the public to lodge any objections with the Elections Dept.
4) If there are valid objections conveyed by the Elections Dept. the parties should amend their lists accordingly, and submit the final District wise merit list on the nominations date.
5) The parties should certify the correctness of the pre-interview information to the Returning officer through an affidavit. Any wrongful information or variance with the mandatory qualifying criteria should allow the Returning officer to immediately reject the name/s of such nominee/s. If disqualifications are detected after the election, voters should be allowed to challenge such elections through election petitions. If such petition is successful, ideally the next candidate in the ‘District Party merit’ list shall fill the vacancy.
We appeal to all genuine politicians, the Elections Commission and civil activists to support this proposed system of ‘Modern Representative Democracy’ as a priority.
Bernard Fernando Moratuwa
Why are the Malays in Gampaha being deprived of a community centre?
One of the largest concentrations of Malays in Sri Lanka live in the Gampaha district. Representatives of the Siyane Malay Association which comprise Malays in the Gampaha, Nittambuwa and Veyangoda areas have been trying to establish a Community Centre for the past two years. As most of them are middle-class wage earners who cannot afford to buy a plot of land and put up a building for the purpose or even purchase a suitable building on their own they made representations to the Parliamentary representative of the Gampaha electorate who is also the Speaker of Parliament. He was supportive and referred it to the Minister of Housing Construction who in turn called for a report from the Divisional Secretariat.
The Grama Niladhari of Nittambuwa too gave his report. But the Malays were dismayed to find that a couple of irresponsible members of their own community had given negative inputs to the Buddhist prelate of the area to take a stand against the creation of a Community Centre for the Malays in the area, even though the Ven. Thera had earlier agreed to the request.
The thousands of Malays who live in the Gampaha district need a place to meet and undertake their social activities without any political agenda. This is a simple, most reasonable cause, without any strings attached. The Community Centre is expected to provide the members the opportunity to work and organize activities for the benefit of local Malays who live far and wide throughout the district. The community needs adult education, social and cultural activities, social support, public information and can only promote peace and harmony among all communities in the area. It will also be the point of contact with other Malays in the country directly or through various Malay Associations.
Here is a community which has always stood by the majority community through thick and thin, even with supreme sacrifices to the country during the separatist conflict. Infact, some Malay war veterans have settled down in the area. This episode as a whole is a prime example why the Malay community needs to be represented in the country’s Parliament.
Anver Kamiss Colombo 5
Our country is where it is because of bigoted views like these
I was surprised to hear a former Education Minister of this country, waxing eloquent about how students from international schools should not be allowed to enter our state universities. He maintained that it would be the end of free education in this country! They, after all, are our children, of Sri Lankan parents and if they so qualify at the A’ level, please let me know why such barriers are even considered?
I personally feel that such bigoted views held by mediocre politicians of the past, are some of the reasons why this country is where it is.
If syllabus problems do not enable such an opportunity to sit for the state A’ levels, I can understand, but to deprive such children who have competed at the same exam and qualified, seems moronic.
Further with the area rule in place, it prevents educated parents from sending their children to a school of their first choice. They are even willing to pay for the early education of their loved ones. When such students wish to proceed for higher education, if they are suitably qualified, they must be given an opportunity to enter a state university.
I have taught at a state university for four decades; to discriminate against students on the basis of their parents’ choice of early education, would be disgusting. Such a view voiced by the particular ex-Education Minister, only speaks volumes for his erudition.
Dr Channa Ratnatunga Via email