Letters
to the Editor
|
|
|||
| The
killing of a judge and a society steeped in violence Violent Sri Lanka is perhaps an apt title. Violence of this nature could perhaps be traced to the late 1960s. This was the period when the roots of the Southern insurrection of 1971 were being created. In the decades since then, we have had what could be called the gun culture. Last Friday's killings ought to be seen in the context of this wider picture. Guns, bombs, arms and armaments are now part and parcel of the Sri Lankan ethos. Thus, violence of this type has emerged as the answer to what persons conceive to be problems. In this case it is the killing of a very highly respected judge who in and through his office combated crime. Even the international media picked up the news of the killing. Such was the significance of this killing. The Chief Justice was there immediately after the killing while the President ordered a full-scale probe. In this scenario, the slain judge must be saluted for his uncompromising work as a judicial officer of the state. I am sure that there are others of his kind, despite the President's recent comment on judicial officers. The pertinent question is, given this picture of a criminal society, what is the role of all of us Sri Lankans? We could ignore this as just another killing, despite the tragedy enacted in a home where the said judge had only the previous day kept his 58th birthday and visited the Kelaniya Temple with his family. On the other hand, all of us are part of this problem. We have allowed violence and abuse to prevail; also crimes to take place. We have, all of us, in a sense accepted this culture. We have allowed our so-called leaders to be violent and abusive in various ways. Perhaps the stoning of the houses of judges during the Jayewardene era is a good example. Every student of sociology knows only too well the prevalent types of violence in our land. Since all of us are part of this violent society, in us are the solutions. While the legal system and the police do their work to combat this type of killing, every effort should be made to eradicate the root causes of these acts of violence. If this killing could be considered as the case study, from what is known it is clear that there are elements in our society who are not prepared to respect the Rule of Law. Then there are the crimes that are prevalent. Criminology will certainly help us to understand the prevalence of these crimes. In this situation is the sad factor that life has become so cheap that a group of persons can mastermind the killing of persons. Analysts may link all this to globalization, and the open economy, etc. However we in Sri Lanka, practise four of the world's major religions. What are we, the adherents of these religions, doing? What about our homes and places of work, education, where we socialise? Aren't we interested in changing our society? When we do not participate in the eradication of the evil in our society, we are in a sense allowing it to grow. More of us should protest about the violent nature of our society. We should also be grateful that there are the Sarath Ambepitiyas of this society, who are prepared to lay down their lives for the sake of what is justice. The UNESCO's thinking is that all violence begins and ends in and through each one of us. Hence the need for a kind of education that will cultivate inner values and a kind of spirituality. What about the criminals? Don't we have to reform them and rehabilitate them? Is it happening sufficiently? These are hard, difficult and urgent questions. May we in Sri Lanka, while saluting the life of Sarath Ambepitiya, endeavour to participate in the eradication of all kinds of violence in our midst. I think we must and we can, given the religious, spiritual heritage which we are heir to as nation.
Sydney Knight A
case for death penalty in a sick society A society can become diseased due to several causes. Politicization of establishments may be the foremost cause. It may affect the economy, education and even judicial decisions, due to which an innocent person who is a murder suspect could become a political victim. Such victimization is irreversible, as no amount of commissions probing the decision, with every change of government, will do any justice to the victim. Also an innocent person may have to face the death penalty, due to poverty, as he cannot retain the best of lawyers. These two reasons may be cogent arguments against the death penalty. There are free legal aid institutions that should and could be strengthened and may even be given state patronage to expand. It is of utmost importance that poor people should be made aware of their existence. Another argument against the death penalty is that, those who have closely associated with persons in the death row maintain that the death penalty has never had a dissuading effect on those who had decided to commit a murder. This may be so, but we need to consider whether these conclusions were made on observing persons in the death row long before traumatic situations such as rebellious upheavals and continuous wars in a society had made it acutely sick and in need of preventive or shock treatment methods to put it right. Shock treatment such as the death penalty may be needed for a society that has assumed the proportions of a sick giant, at least for a limited period. Once the dreadful crescendo of a crime wave is over, perhaps then the teachings of all religions will take on more meaning among those prone to crime. It would be well for all those vehemently against death penalty to band themselves into vigilance committees and pursue the establishment of free legal aid schemes, and also be alert to internationalize unjust judicial decisions, if any. They may also perhaps get into the shoes of a father, mother, brother or sister of a loved one, whose life has been taken away. They may also take into consideration that a spur of the moment killing is met with merciful punishment by courts. Under such conditions should not any nation with an acutely sick society consider introducing the death penalty, for rampant, premeditated and cold-blooded killings? Killing in any form be it statutory or otherwise cannot be condoned, but at times a bitter pill is needed to cure an acute sickness. Thereafter it could be taken out of the statute book. If the death penalty were to be introduced, even for a short period, let it be done in a more humane form rather than the rickety old gallows, even if it were to cost a fortune. Oscar
E. V. Fernando ABCs
of AIDS: C is for condoms not conviction Over 20 years of experience with the HIV/AIDS epidemic from around the world has led to the simple ABC's of HIV/AIDS - A for abstinence from sex, B for being faithful to one faithful and uninfected partner, and C for correct and consistent use of condoms. Abstinence is especially important for young people, who need to be encouraged to delay their sexual activity as long as possible. In countries where the average age of sexual debut has increased, the rate of new HIV infections has fallen. Thus this is a highly effective strategy to protect young people from HIV and to slow the spread of the epidemic among this population group. Being faithful to one faithful and uninfected partner is also an important strategy. But, sadly, we have seen in country after country that faithfulness is a tricky issue. Indeed, in Thailand and India, reports show that the vast majority of women infected with HIV has never had sex with anyone but their husbands. Thus although these women have been faithful, they have still become infected. This is because their husbands have either not been faithful to them, or were already infected at the time of marriage. This brings us to the use of condoms. Contrary to the statement made in the letter published in this paper recently, the C has nothing to do with conviction. It has to do with the regular and correct use of latex condoms every single time one has sex with a partner whose HIV status is unknown or positive. Condoms - when consistently and correctly used - have been proved to be extremely effective in preventing the HIV virus from passing between people during sexual intercourse. As long as we are too shy or too uncomfortable to talk about, purchase and use condoms, we are putting ourselves at risk. In situations where abstinence or being faithful are not possible options, it is only condoms that can prevent HIV and save lives.
Janet L. Leno
University
certificate of error All this originated from the errors I pointed out in a university certificate brought to my notice by a graduate from the 2002 batch. Let it please be understood that the exposure of errors, as I see it, was not done with any malicious intention or for any egoistic satisfaction, but to have my doubts dispelled. I thank Mr. Karunaratne for his pointed and well-defined attack on the use of the archaic word, "Holden" in the university certificate referred to. His well-researched, logical analysis should surely open the eyes of the university (authorities) concerned.
T.P. Paul To
stop conversions, help the poor Buddhists The fund should be utilized to help poor Buddhists who are the target of evangelists.
R. De Silva
'Letters
to the Editor' should be brief and to the point. Address them to: 'Letters to the Editor, The Sunday Times, P.O.Box 1136, Colombo, Sri Lanka. Or e-mail to editor@sundaytimes.wnl.lk or features@sundaytimes.wnl.lk Please note that letters cannot be acknowledged or returned. |
||||
Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers
Ltd. All rights reserved. |
