Presidential
pronouncements
The President seems to be in an uproarious mood these days. Not
un-characteristically, though. Consider some of her more recent
statements: 90 per cent of those in politics are in for business
she says. 80 per cent of those in Sri Lanka are for a Federation,
she wagers.
Not
even five cents has been received as Tsunami aid from foreign countries
- despite all the pledges, she swears. On the first two contentions,
it's a mystery where she got her statistics from.
On
the not five cents theory, as President of the country she ought
to know that monies have indeed come to her Treasury coffers, even
though she seems cannily unconcerned about an unaccounted sum of
money in the President's Fund.
Such
momentary fusillades of pronouncements from her have been the hallmark
of her ten-year rule, and almost certainly won't find a place in
the biography of her written by one of her loyal servants which
was released this week.
Some
feel that the advent of the day of departure -- the day her twin-term
will automatically lapse - may have caused the added adrenaline
rush in her. There is doubt and suspense thrown into the poser as
to when the country's all-powerful incumbent President's term ends.
The
President is moving very clearly towards a constitutional amendment
it appears, a long anticipated one. This amendment it is being said
will - under the guise of introducing a Federal structure as a sop
to separatism, alter the Presidential system.
of
Government and replace it with a constitutional regime that will
permit her to remain in the political arena without having to bow
out of it. The road to a country's rise is not always paved with
good intentions. It needn't be.An old adage of the poet Pope which
has found currency throughout the world has been " For forms
of Government let fools contest; that which is best administered,
is best". The question that arises therefore, is whether this
blatantly partisan and expedient move to amend the Constitution
is good for the country.
As
for Federalism, this is a question that goes into the root of Nationalist
opposition to the division of this country. The issue is not on
the use of the mere word 'Federalism ', but on what powers are to
be vested in the proposed Federal states in miniscule Sri Lanka.
The real issue is whether these federal structures will be the stepping-stone
to a separate state that accelerates the demand for secession, a
demand that has still to be dropped by the LTTE.
On
the issue of abolition of the Executive Presidency - our position
has long been that a Presidential dictatorship or a Prime Ministerial
dictatorship makes little difference. But indeed, between the two
systems, we would opt for a parliamentary democracy with all its
faults, as we have seen the worst aspects of a cocooned and rarefied
Presidency, far removed from the aspirations of the people; an institution
often bitterly partisan, and used for parochial purposes in the
past quarter of a century.
And
yet, we know, the contemplated end solution is going to run into
political considerations. The nationalists and the separatists will
oppose Federalism; the minorities will oppose the abolition of the
Executive Presidency, and the opposition UNP will want to continue
with what was their system of Government, with alterations.
And
so we go back to the need for some clarity on matters which the
President has herself clouded with her recent remarks. When she
says that the nation has not received five cents from foreign countries
at a time when her Foreign Minister is on a tour thanking foreign
donors, we appear to be at the butt end of global stand up comedians.
The
Foreign Minister says in London that British relief afforded to
Sri Lanka reduced Sri Lanka's interest repayment on a multi-lateral
basis by 10 per cent. NGOs and foreign governments have given cash
for tsunami relief through the banking system of the country. Millions
of rupees have come this way. To say the least, the presidential
pronouncement is going to raise more than a few eye-brows everywhere.
Already,
her transparency vis-a-vis the tsunami relief effort is in this
light under scrutiny, and under court scrutiny also incidentally.
On the other hand, if what the President says is true (that the
country. has received no funds despite the pledges) this must be
the biggest hoax in modern times played by the so-called international
donor community on the rest of the world.
But,
at least if the President reads from a prepared text and not ad
lib as she goes along, contradicting, embarrassing and misleading,
perhaps at least some of this confusion -- leave alone the hilarity
if not the dangers of her pronouncements -- can be avoided. |