Officers and gentlemen
The stand-off witnessed last week between the Elections
Commis- sioner and the Inspector General of Police is the best indicator
yet of what is to come in terms of rigging and malpractice in the polls
that are scheduled. Not that both these gentlemen or at least those who
discharged their duties in the form of their predecessors, have been above
board and squeaky clean in the elections that have gone before this one.
Both IGP and Commissioner of Elections have got away too easily in the
cases of election fraud that have been previously perpetrated on the people.
Only two elections in the recent remembered past have got the nod of approval
of the public — the 1977 election where a government changed, and the 1994
election where a government changed again. Not that governments need to
change for an election to obtain the people's stamp of approval, but it
is a fact that the Referendum of 1982, the elections of 1989, and all the
presidential, parliamentary and provincial elections held since 1994 are
questionable to say the least.
The role of the police in the elections is that of sentinel, but today
the police officer has been reduced to the level of a by-stander at best,
that is, if he is not actively conniving in the process of stuffing ballot
boxes.
Stooging and dealing in promotions for patronage among senior officers
have led to the ordinary constable's position in society becoming quite
untenable. The mustachioed police officer may have his limousine to run
around in, with the insignia of his office emblazoned on his chest. But
some of the lower rankers are in fact ashamed to wear their uniforms because
their positions have been compromised due to the stooging that is being
carried on by their senior officers.
In many other democracies which still remain democratic in practice,
the presence of a solitary police constable in a polling station is sufficient
to give the voter the confidence to cast his ballot without intimidation.
This is the kind of society that Sri Lanka was, and must return to.
The issue now usually ends up before the judiciary, which is supposed
to be the last bastion of democratic accountability — but the less said
about that the better as well. Things should not come to this pass anyway,
and elections do not have to inevitably end up in courts of law for further
judgment. But it is so, because public officers have been made pawns of
political players who have nothing, but their own greater good at heart.
Unfit to vote?
An organization which goes by the acronym ACTFORM (Action network for migrant
workers), has written to the Commissioner of Elections saying that the
estimated 1 million Sri Lankan migrant workers now employed abroad are
not entitled to vote at elections in Sri Lanka because laws in the country
do not make provision for such voting.
ACTFORM then goes onto make the valid observations that migrant workers
will make a significant difference in the polling and arguably in election
results, and that unused votes of migrant workers are abused for the purposes
of impersonation.
In a close call and we have had many in the past — one million votes
is of tremendous import, but migrant workers, whose contribution to the
economy cannot be underscored have no voice, and it's not funny their money
is considered good, but their vote is considered expendable? |
