Focus on Rights

Affirming an audacious faith
When Martin Luther King accepted the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo on December 10, 1964, declaring that he had an 'audacious faith in the future of mankind' he did so with immense humility.

At that time, the civil rights movement of which he was indisputably the leader, was moving with determination and a majestic scorn for risk and danger towards its goal of establishing America as a country in which justice and equality prevailed.

Even at that point, Dr. King had a profound faith in his belief that non-violence is the answer to crucial political and moral violence of the times, underscoring the need for people "to overcome" violence without resorting to violence in turn. He reasoned that these beliefs were in fact, why he had been honoured with the Nobel peace prize.

Thus, his refusal to "accept despair as the final response to the antiquities of history". Thus, his belief that "wounded justice, lying prostrate on the blood flowing streets of our nation, can be lifted from this dust of shame, to reign supreme among the children of men," as he accepted the prize, while African-Americans were, even then, back in America, being met with fire hoses, snarling dogs and even death for insisting on the right to vote.

Four years later, Dr. King was assassinated, shot down while leaving his motel. This week, a beleaguered America, as well as the entire world remembers his celebrated "I have a dream" speech delivered on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on August 28, 1963, to 200,000 peaceful protesters, comprising whites as well as African-Americans gathered to commemorate the 100th anniversary of he Emancipation Proclamation.

Interestingly, later years saw friction between Dr. King and other African-American leaders on fundamental issues. Thus, while Dr. King increasingly embraced a wide philosophy, urging that inequality was common to Hispanics and Asians as well as African-Americans, his colleagues preferred to limit the struggle to racial inequality of the African-Americans alone.

Martin Luther King also protested against the involvement of America in the Vietnam war, saying that the war poisoned the atmosphere of the whole country and made solutions of local problems, unrealistic.

It is useful in this context, to note the two specific philosophies that influenced Martin Luther King in his formative years. These were respectively the Gandhian ideals of 'Satyagraha' and the writings of Henry David Thoreau, urging civil disobedience against unjust laws.

It does not augur well for us, that these philosophies would seem to be quaint and outdated today. At that time, Dr. King's belief was that America's people will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character. He thought, in fact, that these ideals were rooted in the concept of the American dream itself.

From one perspective, this was correct as the American Dream, in that sense, was based on fundamental precepts of equality and justice, and the notion that an individual, regardless of colour, creed or class, could become a honoured and valued citizen.
From another perspective, the bastardized version of this dream which posits the almighty dollar as the final goal worth achieving, regardless of the means, is the very opposite of what Dr. King preached.

In yet another sense, the manner in which America is now viewed by many countries in the world, with all the dark undertones of might, arrogance and brute strength could not be more anti-ethical to Martin Luther King's 'visionary dream' articulated forty years ago.
As far as racism itself is concerned meanwhile, this has merely gone underground in America in many respects, thus becoming harder to fight than when it was overt and forceful. These are then, saddening reflections on the fortieth anniversary of the "I have a dream" address, despite the glorious memories and the very real gains of the civil rights movement in America.

These reflections, with regard to a country unique as it still remains despite her current convulsions, are of interest to Sri Lanka unlike the American Civil Rights Movement, we have not had parallel strivings towards justice and equality. Instead, what we have manifested is a fundamental inability to come to grips with issues that go to the heart of our existence as a nation.

The question of the judiciary in this context, is very apt. We saw the conflict between the judiciary and the executive in the seventies, when attempts were made to intimidate judges. We saw this in the eighties when judges' houses were stoned following the delivering of decisions perceived to be against the government at that time. And we saw this most notably in the nineties when judgments on rights issues were disparaged by politicians and judges criticized openly in Parliament. In recent times, disputes revolving round the judiciary and the office of the Chief Justice have been unsurpassed in the history of this country.

The question then centres on the responses of rights activists in this country to these issues. While we did not assuredly have leaders of the calibre of Dr. King to guide us, were protests of a lesser nature manifested?

As validly pointed out by the Asian Human Rights Commission, in a statement issued this week, the decision by one of Sri Lanka's most respected judges of the Supreme Court, Justice Mark D.H. Fernando to send in papers for premature retirement to President Kumaratunga, whilst having two-and-a-half years to continue in office, is yet another adverse notch on the wall.

The AHRC statement points out that the decision by Justice Fernando, long noted for his independence and integrity, to retire prematurely can only have an negative effect on citizens' trust in public institutions meant to safeguard the Rule of Law.

As far as Sri Lanka is concerned now, it is appropriate to remember that shortly before he was assassinated, Dr. King said memorably "We have got some difficult days ahead. But, it does not matter to me now. Because I have been to the mountain top. And I don't mind".

These are inspiring sentiments indeed. We would be fortunate if we could glimpse even the glimmerings of a similar hope for us, at least at some point in the future.

Back to Columns