Editorial

Two incidents this week, both coincidentally happening at the Colombo International Airport, and both involving Members of Parliament once again brought to light the decadence of the prevailing political culture that has been highlighted in many ways since it exploded last year with the ‘Aragalaya’.

One was where an MP who also holds the office of a state minister facilitated the release of a Chinese passenger who tried to enter the country with a forged travel document saying he was a potential investor. Immigration authorities obliged, and are now subjected to an inquiry – not the state minister. If what the state minister claims is true, it also betrays what kind of ‘investors’ this country is looking at.

The second episode is where an MP was arrested for smuggling gold in his hand luggage. His ‘cock and bull’ defence was even worse than his offence, but he was eventually let off with a paltry fine. Some sarcastically ask why he didn’t say he brought the gold to the country as an investment. The arrest was on a tip-off to the Customs Revenue Task Directorate. Such tip-offs do not come about normal passengers, but about those who are usually part of smuggling rings. Our Political Editor has the details on this page.

In the United Kingdom, the Home Secretary, when she was the Attorney General no less, is under fire for asking public officials to help her over a speeding offence. She is accused of violating not only the law, but also the ‘Ministerial Code’ that outlines how senior politicians holding public office must conduct themselves and how they must not interfere with the work of public officials.

Britain adopted a Ministerial Code soon after World War II (1945) and has kept updating it. Though Sri Lanka followed the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy, such a code was never dreamed of until very recently when it came up with a Code of Conduct for MPs (2018). The Sri Lankan Code, however, seems to have a rider that “the private and personal lives of such persons (MPs)” are not regulated by it. Ex-facie, there is a sharp and significant difference with the British Ministerial Code.

Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is currently giving evidence before a judge inquiring whether he violated his own COVID-19 lockdown laws.

In Britain, there is some element of accountability and scrutiny for the actions of those elected to public office, but there is seemingly none in Sri Lanka. To cap it, Sri Lankan MPs carry the honorific ‘Honourable’. Former Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar once told a UK-Sri Lanka Society dinner; “In Britain, MPs are not referred to as ‘Honourable’, but some of them are. In Sri Lanka, MPs are referred to as ‘Honourable’, but some of them aren’t”.

What is common, however, is that whether in the UK or Sri Lanka, they are of a similar breed and speak a common language when caught doing the wrong thing. They cry of ‘political witch-hunts’. This can be heard even in the United States with one Mr. Donald Trump these days.

It is a pity that some decent sticks in Parliament get painted with the same brush when some of their colleagues do not play by the rules. That is why there is a call, which has widespread public endorsement that all 225 MPs must go home. And when good men and women stay silent and do not push for reform of their own colleagues, the condemnation is justified. The only issue that has been raised in Parliament with a call for an inquiry by the House Ethics and Privileges Committee is that of the MP caught smuggling.

Even in Britain, standards in public life have dropped, but the institutional mechanism at least keeps issues alive, not easily swept under the carpet.

Here, corruption and abuse of power at the highest levels have seeped down to ministries and departments. The honest few are getting outnumbered by the ever-increasing number wallowing in sleaze using their public office. To expect them to maintain high standards of propriety and behaviour is an impossible task when they turn around and quote the magic words “We have a mandate from the people”. During the last Parliament, MPs threw chairs and chili powder at their opponents and one of them sat on the Speaker’s chair preventing him from conducting proceedings of this august assembly.

It was one of the ugliest incidents inside the sanctum sanctorum of Parliament. A House committee found as many as 60 MPs responsible for the chaos that day. The committee report was forwarded to the House Ethics and Privileges Committee thereafter. The CID commenced a separate inquiry. It was then argued that ‘what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas’. After some time when the dust had settled, the entire matter was dropped. Most of those MPs were appointed by their parties once again to contest at the subsequent election and were returned to Parliament by their voters.

Thus, it is a huge ask to see the current matter being conducted to a finality with whatever sanction is available, which is at most, a temporary suspension from Parliament or a reference to the Supreme Court for further action.

It is not unreasonable, therefore, to say the people get the MPs they deserve. Come the next election, many of them will receive nominations again from their parties and probably even get re-elected.

The British Prime Minister is accused of being ‘soft’ against his Home Secretary for her indiscretions. He is weak because everything depends on intra-party support and parliamentary voting for a weak Prime Minister as he is. Such is the case for the President and all party leaders in Sri Lanka whose parliamentary vote bases are wobbly and on thin ice. MPs know they can get away with anything in such situations.

The case of the ‘Honourable’ MP caught for smuggling takes the cake. He gets off with an unusually low fine, then comes to Parliament and votes against a government-sponsored resolution not on its merits, but ‘because the government did not help’ with his smuggling attempt.