News
Sri Lanka’s political culture and the case of Kabir Hashim
View(s):Reports in several newspapers last week brought to the fore, weaknesses in the country’s political culture that impact on the country’s democracy in an adverse manner. The newspaper reports referred to an incident that took place in the Anuradhapura District 10 years ago, during the 1999 Presidential Election.
According to the reports, the acting Magistrate of Thambuttegama Magistrate’s Court, remanded several persons related to an incident, where damage of over Rs 30 million had been caused to the house of the UNP’s Kalawewa Electorate Manager Ananda Weragoda, by a grenade hurled at the latter’s house.
One newspaper report revealed that, although the Magistrate at the time of the incident, had on two occasions, ordered the Police to arrest and produce the suspects in Court, the order had not been carried out.
After the present Government came to power, the victim, Weragoda, had made a fresh complaint to the then IGP Pujitha Jayasundera, consequent to which, investigations into the incident had recommenced and thereafter, the Police had reported the progress in their investigations to Court, while the extracts relating to the investigations were sent to the Attorney General (AG). Upon examination of the extracts, the AG had directed the Police to arrest the suspects and produce them in Court.
What is interesting from the perceptive of the prevailing political culture however, is the identity of the suspects. The suspects include the Mayor of Anuradhapura, the former Chairman of the North-Central Provincial Council, Chairman of the Talawa Pradeshiya Sabha (PS) and Vice Chairman of the Rajanganaya PS.
During the past 10 years, these politicians, not only roamed free, but were able to contest elections and be elected to hold high political office through the votes of the public.
It is customary for the public to criticise and blame politicians for the ills of the country, forgetting that they themselves are the ones who are responsible for electing such politicians, as is evident from the above details. The political parties that presented these individuals as candidates too, have to share the blame for the deteriorating political culture.
All those who have been accused have been nominated by their political parties and have won acceptance from the public, by being elected to very high political office in the area. The fact that these politicians are suspected to have been involved in acts of violence, would have been known to the people of the area, who have, by electing them to office, endorsed their violent actions.
Clearly, not much will change in the country, unless the voters themselves adopt suitable criteria such as honesty, dedication, incorruptibility, democratic values etc, as suitable qualities to be considered for election to political office.
The political discourse surrounding another recent incident is further indicative of the unsatisfactory political values that influence the prevalent political culture. When the Muslim ministers and deputy ministers resigned their portfolios, they came in for flak from several sections of the polity.
The ministers resigned only because of the increasing fears of attacks on the Muslim community, by rabble rousers who were threatening to unleash mobs to burn Muslim shops and attack Muslim homes.
The Muslim ministers had no option but to take this action, in order to register their protest and express their dissatisfaction at the inaction and the failure of the Government to provide security to the Muslims. There decision was not prompted by any desire to express solidarity with any minister or any of the Governors whom Ven Rathana Thera wanted removed.
But, what is interesting, in relation to the issues governing the political culture, is the argument that Minister Kabir Hashim should not have resigned because he was elected mostly by Sinhala voters, although he did obtain a substantial number of Muslim votes. This argument has been thrown about without being challenged, showing the level to which the political culture has deteriorated.
The answer to this argument ism that, irrespective of who votes for a candidate, the Member of Parliament who is elected, is expected to work and represent all the people, including non -voters in his electorate. In this sense, he has to serve all those in his constituency, irrespective of whether they voted for him or not.
But, additionally, a Parliamentarian is also required to stand up against injustice and wrongdoing wherever it occurs. In the current instance, Kabir Hashim, standing up for the right of the Muslims to be protected by the State, did not in any way go against the Sinhalese, because a majority of the right thinking Sinhalese did not endorse the hate campaign against the Muslims.
This is not a new phenomenon in Sri Lanka’s political landscape, because there have been many Sinhala parliamentarians who have stood up for and spoken up for the rights of the Tamil community, despite there being no Tamils in their electorates
Thus the argument that Kabir Hashim should not have resigned, is only an extension of the argument that Sinhalese should vote only for Sinhalese, Tamils should vote only for Tamils and Muslims should vote only for Muslims. This would only perpetuate the divisions in Sri Lanka’s polity on communal lines, and be detrimental to the Nation Building effort. The statement by Ven Rathana Thera that the Sinhala voter will teach Kabir Hashim a lesson at the next Elections, clearly shows he does not understand the political maturity of the Sinhala voter.
It is time that the country works towards an electoral system and a political culture where voters make choices with regard to representation on the basis of policy and principles, rather than mere ethnicity or religion. Only then, can Sri Lanka take its place as a truly democratic member of the world community. (javidyusuf@gmail.com)