The right to vote is one of the important characteristics of a democracy. However whether it is a well functioning and healthy democracy will depend, additionally, on the existence of several other factors like the people’s participation in the affairs of government during the period between elections, the existence of an environment conducive to the free expression of one’s views including a free press, the Rule of Law and so on.
 |
In the context of the forthcoming Presidential Elections and the call to boycott the elections by the All Ceylon Tamil Congress which is a constituent of the Tamil National Alliance, it is important to examine the implications of such a course of conduct by the TNA or indeed of any other group. In constitutional terms, the franchise is an integral part of the exercise of the sovereignty of the people and refraining from casting one’s vote tantamount to abdication of one’s sovereignty. Of course in certain very limited situations a boycott has a potent message. For example, in a one party State in which elections are held with only one candidate contesting a boycott would convey the message that such an election was farcical and lacked legitimacy.
But in real terms and in the current Sri Lankan context any boycott of the Presidential Elections would mean shirking the responsibility vested in the people by the Constitution to participate in choosing the Government as well as determining the direction the country is going to take in the next few years. No minority can afford to engage in politics of negativity. Rather their claims to being a stakeholder in the governance of the country must be reflected in its active participation in all affairs of governance including a Presidential Election.
At the last Presidential election, the LTTE prevented the Tamil community from casting their vote (although some euphemistically called it a boycott). When one examines the slim margin by which President Mahinda Rajapaksa won that election, the Tamil vote may have been decisive, depending on how they voted. Thus it could be safely said the LTTE’s action in compelling them not to exercise their vote in 2005 denied the Tamils an opportunity to influence the course of events in the country in the past few years. One of the main demands of the Tamil polity is that they want a share in the decision making process in the country. Such a claim is made a mockery when one of the most important decision making process such as electing a President is not availed of and the election boycotted. People often complain about politicians without realizing that they too have to take responsibility for the persons who are elected to office. By boycotting an election they may be responsible for ensuring that the wrong candidate is elected.
The duty of a political party that seeks to represent a community is to give leadership and guidance to its followers. If a political party or its leadership fails to fulfil this responsibility by misdirecting its followers or supporters it is guilty of a grave dereliction of duty. It is very clear that sections of the Tamil political leadership are very confused as to what course of action it should take. The biggest mistake it made in the past was to put all its political eggs in the LTTE basket. This also resulted in a freeze on the intellectual activity and political thinking of the community. Consequently in the post LTTE era the Tamil community is struggling to figure out its strategy with regard to what direction it should take politically.
This is one of the most critical elections in recent Sri Lankan history. The end of the war with the defeat and annihilation of the LTTE has left the country and the different communities that comprise the Sri Lankan nation with a whole host of challenges to meet. The culmination of the war has provided us an opportunity not to repeat the mistakes of the past and to face up to the onerous task of national reconciliation and nation building with renewed vigour. It would be a shame if an important segment of Sri Lankan society, namely the Tamil community, opts out of this task by not exercising its responsibility to participate in the election of the Head of State. Failure to do so will undermine the rightful claim of the Tamil community that they are equal stakeholders, along with the other communities, in determining the destiny of the country.
It is better to have participated in the Presidential Election and supported a candidate even if he does not get elected or if elected turns out to be the wrong choice rather than remain neutral. Such participation will entitle that voter or community of voters to have a claim on the President by virtue of owning the process of electing a President and thus remain a stakeholder in the nation building exercise.
The writer welcomes comments from readers and maybe reached on javidyusuf@yahoo.com |
E-mail