Columns

Politics thy name is hypocrisy. Criss-crossing and double-crossing are turning out to be an intrinsic part of this political game.

Only last month, the UK held a peaceful parliamentary election. But before that, one heard little or nothing of politicians pole-vaulting from one side to the other or back again or even into a third party, as Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s snap election gathered speed.

That is the kind of thing we do not hear around these woods, certainly not with the frequency that we see and hear these days in Sri Lanka, where the momentum is gathering as the crossers and double-crossers make public announcements of the why and wherefore of their sudden choices.

It reminds me of a day in 1965 when that veteran member of the Communist Party and Kotte MP, Stanley Tillakeratne, who had crossed over from the CP to join the Sirima Bandaranaike-led SLFP government, was walking down a corridor in the courts complex at Hulftsdorp. The story goes that one of his fellow lawyers stopped Stanley.

“Oh, you must be very tired, Stanley,” the lawyer friend said.

“Why should I be tired?” asked Stanley, saying he did not run a marathon.

“Well, after yesterday’s long jump,” he said and walked off, leaving the usually vociferous Stanley Tillakeratne struggling for a retort.

Apocryphal or not, long jumpers in those days were treated with some disdain and sarcasm.

But this is a game that has been played for years, and the reason given for the long or high jumping is what, in the adapted words of the late Foreign Minister Lakshman Kadirgamar, is where the cake was baked.

And that particular cake is called hypocrisy, especially these days when there appear to be mass migrations and even migrations in reverse with a return to where the bread is better buttered—and these are mainly those who can afford bread but would like layers of butter and jam on it.

But as I said, this has been going on for decades, and yet no party or leader has moved a muscle to stop this asylum-seeking except perhaps the NPP.

Browsing through some past copies—going back years and even decades—of The Sunday Times in search of some articles, I encountered an editorial that beat me to calling this double-crossing game hypocrisy.

Titled “Cheating voters by crossovers,” the editorial of September 28, 2010, quite rightly had this to say:

“One of the aberrations of the country’s electoral system is the ability for elected representatives of the people, be they Members of Parliament or local council members, to obtain their vote from one political party and have unfettered access—a right of way as it were—often to the ruling party.

“Hardly five months into an elected six-year term, to which all MPs were elected in this seventh Parliament since the 1978 Constitution, some of them have brazenly kicked their voters in the rear and gone and voted against the decision of the party from which they were elected.

“All of them, without exception, have declared that they crossed over because “the country comes before the party,” which statement should normally move one to tears. Why one can’t be so moved is because of the blatant hypocrisy in this.”

Almost 15 years ago, this newspaper was drawing editorial attention to this practice that not only undermines the democratic system but betrays the intentions and hopes of the voters. But does that really matter to those politicians playing Judas or to the party leadership that welcomes them to their fold?

Not having read this editorial before, I sat down to pen this column, not realising that the Editor of The Sunday Times had already exposed this hypocrisy, for at that time I was posted in Bangkok and hardly the time to peruse the Sri Lankan newspapers—if they did reach the embassy.

Apart from this being labelled hypocrisy, the editorial drove a well-deserved knife into the heart of the matter. The way some of these political migrants try to justify their conduct and actions by showing a hitherto undetected and later publicly despised patriotism is what is ignoble and leads to the loss of whatever public faith is left in our politicians and those who welcome them with open arms to buttress their own positions and extend them where and whenever possible.

If all those who publicly claim to be patriots to justify what they did for the love of the nation and not for self-aggrandisement were lined one behind the other, that should surely stretch around the borders of Sri Lanka.

“Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel,” said Samuel Johnson very aptly. This is not to say that all patriots are scoundrels, for there are those who have a genuine feeling and devotion for one’s country and have contributed so much to the nation without all the baloney that politicians regurgitate from time to time.

They do not go around announcing themselves as patriots who will do anything and everything for their country.

Sri Lanka went down the drain a couple of years ago. How many of those who now parade as saviours of the country and wear the badge of patriotism prominently pinned to their shirts or clothes, so to say, actually scatter themselves among the political parties in search of some position that will enhance their lifestyle?

Isn’t the real reason for many of these crossovers the desire to bloat themselves more and serve to help their families and friends in whatever way they could? Patriotism is only the mask they wear but can be seen through for what they are worth.

When Ranil Wickremesinghe assumed the presidency with the help of the Rajapakse-led “Pohottuwa,” he read the situation and announced to parliament that the country had no foreign reserves and was in dire straits and drastic steps were needed to stop the slide to chaos.

How many of those who were cabinet ministers or state ministers at the time decided and indeed announced to the public that they were ready to sacrifice the privileges and perks they enjoyed since donning their ministerial garb?

Is there evidence that any of them surrendered any of those privileges for the love of the nation they only holler about? Is there any evidence that cabinet ministers banded together and agreed to relinquish at least some of their privileges at a time when the country was in economic trouble and so doing helped the nation?

If there are such patriots who have surrendered at least some of their privileges that bear a heavy burden on the public purse, would they please stand up and be counted?

Is it not wrong to believe that crossovers are generally to win favours, such as cabinet or state minister posts or state jobs for non-MPs, if and when the party they joined comes to power?

How many can really deny that this is the motivating reason for hopping from party to party and not all this spurious patriotism and love for the country?

(Neville de Silva is a veteran Sri Lankan journalist who was Assistant Editor of the Hong Kong Standard and worked for Gemini News Service in London. Later, he was Deputy Chief-of-Mission in Bangkok and Deputy High Commissioner in London.)