In this part of the world, the very idea of sharing power with women, be it in the home or workplace, is viewed with suspicion. Traditionalists would promptly quote the "Kavyasekaraya" to you, and advise that a woman must necessarily walk two steps behind her husband, and however flawed the husband's character, not speak about it. But that was a different era and the context different.
Modern women are as educated and ambitious about their careers as their male counterparts. Despite patriarchal dominance, women are seeking better opportunities to reach the decision making level jobs, the top rung. In the threshold of a new millennium, women also desire the creation of a female bastion in politics.
The perennial argument put forward by patriarchal societies is that women have a more important role to play as mother and housewife, and other entanglements would tax their time. A woman's role is advocated to be that of the passive home maker, not the trail blazing career woman or politician. Her singular political activity is to exercise her universal franchise, and on occasion, according to her husband's dictates. The only time women are seen politically active is when they campaign for others, of course males.
South Asian countries despite the various constraints prevalent, have produced a considerable percentage of educated women. They have entered competitive fields, and are standing abreast with their male counterparts. Yet, politics has gently closed its doors for them and the intolerance displayed by males towards women entering politics is astounding.
As the famous American adage goes, South East Asian females enter the fray only "over dead bodies", meaning that the few openings our women have had were created by deaths of family members. Being traditional societies, certain families and particularly names have standard vote banks. This feudalistic attitude has persisted to the bane of the community while women have entered politics upon the death of their fathers, husbands, brothers and sons- once again subscribing to the unwritten theory that it is a male domain and women cannot enter it on merit. The thinking is that in their absence, perhaps the women could try their hand at it, a theory women so far have played into.
According to Dr. Selvi Thiruchandran, Executive Director of the Women's Research and Education Centre, this itself is a negative belief.
"Women enter politics mostly because circumstances compel them to, and not due to an abiding interest in it. Perhaps the reason is that political parties do not want certain vote banks to be neglected. They would not originally give nomination to women and award the opportunity only when the apple cart is being upset," she says.
During the post-independence era in this country, Lady Adeline Molamure and Cissie Cooray were the first to enter the legislature, creating an opening for women entrants. In 1954, it was Clodagh Kitchilan, and in 1960, Mrs. Sirimavo Ratwatte Dias Bandaranaike who created political history by becoming the world's first woman Premier. She showed her acumen and ability to contest and convincingly won in 1965 securing 58% of the total vote cast. Mrs. Sita Seneviratne was the next to enter Parliament in 1967.
In 1989, the highest representation of women so far of 12 members was recorded. At present, there are 11 members, four UNP and seven from the PA in Parliament.
However,
in recognition of the female population of the country, all females were
entrusted with portfolios by the PA. Apart from Prime Minister Sirimavo
Bandaranaike, there is a Cabinet member Mrs. Hema Ratnayake while four
others were made deputies. It is significant that President Chandrika Bandaranaike
Kumaratunga (despite her traditional Bandaranaike vote bank) was a new
entrant to mainstream politics, and polled the highest number of preferential
votes cast for any individual in the history of Sri Lankan politics, that
of 64.8%.
One glaringly obvious fact is that despite the necessity to highlight the various issues affecting the minority communities, minority political parties have failed to give nomination to their community members. At present, the only minority female legislator is Mrs. Rasamanohari Pulendran representing the UNP. Also, only the two main political parties have been receptive to the call for greater participation of women in politics, though the accommodation was marginal.
According to latest statistics available, despite women forming 50% of the total population, women legislators only constitute 4.5% of our Parliament. At Municipal Council level, participation is 2.8% while in other local government bodies it is a scarce 1.1%. Out of the 225 members in the current Parliament, only eleven are women, constituting less than 5% of the entire legislature. Out of 235 Provincial Councillors , there isn't a single woman councillor, and out of 1152 local government representatives, only 47 are women.
According to statisticians, the 1931-1936 State Council too had 5% women. It is a violation of the principles of democracy that half the country's population has only 11/225 seats in Parliament, and never been able to secure more than 5% of seats in the legislative assembly. Since independence, we have produced only 44 women Parliamentarians, and two Prime Ministers who are incidentally mother and daughter.
The problem is acute at local government level, which actually needs more female participation to tackle issues at grass root level. At this level, women have an important and effective role to play. However, showing an upward trend, the recent local government elections held in March had 20 women elected for 238 local bodies; again less than 1 %.
This is why Dr. Thiruchandran proposes a fifty percent women component in political parties should become a matter of policy. "Unless women come out and seek a positive role in politics by doing away with 'over the dead bodies' politics, there is no future for them. In a sense, women are used here to exploit the traditional vote banks."
This proposal has received mixed reactions. City father Karu Jayasuriya, according to Dr. Thiruchandran has been most receptive, and encouraged the idea. Further, he has proposed that a programme be implemented whereby women become active participants in the decision making process. The Women's Education and Research Centre (WERC) has met several political parties in this regard, and the response has been good.
A spokesman for the UNP said that there were difficulties in harnessing women's support, and it was this reason which made women's participation at party level scant. The UNP manifesto states the creation of an environment which assists women to realize their full potential and prevention of discrimination as two main objectives of the party. At present, its youth wing has laid out several rules to enhance women's participation. Out of the posts of President, Secretary and Treasurer, one must necessarily be held by a female. If not, 1/3 of the entire committee must consist of females.
Similarly, the SLFP has also recognized the need to have more women politicians. In a new commitment, the SLFP intends absorbing more youths and women into their cadres.
There are several constraints on females who desire an entry in to the field. Their reluctance is mostly due to the unprecedented levels of violence associated with politics today and the socially imposed restrictions. Character assassination and the killer competition are other deterrents. When a woman's character is tarnished , even verbally, it affects the whole family. Women have also traditionally been conditioned to think that their role is in the home, and not in the competitive arena of politics.
"We are urging political parties to come forward and create a quota/reservation system as a preliminary step. It is the only way to ease out the tension. If there is a start, there would be more women entering the field than running away from it," said Dr. Thiruchandran.
She proposes a two way process. The reservation system would reserve a certain percentage of seats in Parliament and other state assemblies while the quota system would allocate a certain quota of nomination within the political parties.
This,
she believes, would encourage women to become more involved, especially
when they are being facilitated at various levels to ensure greater participation.
Sri Lanka's neighbours have set an example in this regard. At the recently
concluded Delhi Municipal Corporation elections, 1/3 of the seats were
reserved for women and legislation was also passed in this regard. Pakistan
and Bangladesh are two countries which are expected to adopt the same shortly.
Our women are plagued by family politics, asserts Dr. Thiruchandran,
as in other South East Asian nations. There is an impression that political
awareness is high in the third world countries. This may be true of certain
persons who enter politics pursuing a family tradition. Unlike other countries,
it appears that there are more women political leaders in this part of
the world. Khalida Zia and Sheik Hasina of Bangladesh, Benazir Bhutto of
Pakistan, Sirimavo Bandaranaike and Chandrika Kumaratunga of Sri Lanka
were compelled to enter the fray. But Maneka, widow of Sanjiv Gandhi was
accepted as a highly political woman who chose the role she played in Indian
politics, although for a short time. But one example of a spirited entry
perhaps was Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Su kye , who continues to
set a shining example of undisputed virtue by her democratic struggle for
Burma's political emancipation. 
Other South East Asian nations and some Scandinavian countries have facilitated women by the introduction of a quota system. Successive Indian governments have recognized the importance of having a larger female component in Parliament. At present, 30% of Indian legislators are women, and at the local government level the percentage is much higher.
It is learnt that the Sri Lankan government intends proposing to reserve 25% of the seats at Parliament elections for women. The reservation/quota system is proposed for a short period to encourage women to have better participation, and subsequently to contest their male counterparts on an equal level playing ground.
Dr. Thiruchandran asserts that this would help alleviate many social ills that are plaguing society. There are specific gender related issues and problems like alcohol, child abuse, environment etc.; which draw more female attention. She adds that it is accepted that women have cleaner dealings, so bribery and corruption would also be considerably decreased.
With women constituting 50 % of the population and the country's labour force, the demand for more representation seems legitimate. Even though 50 % participation appears a little too ambitious, the two proposed pathways for women to enter politics at legislature level will seek to alleviate a monumental imbalance in female representation at the highest decision making level. It is not too much to expect from the country which produced the world's first woman Premier.
In this age of the global village, where inter national travel has become common for business as well as pleasure, a number of European Community (EC) countries (in particular United Kingdom, Germany, France and Benelux countries) are enforcing unfair travel restrictions on travellers from Asia and Africa. For instance, if a Sri Lankan traveller is visiting an African country via London or Frankfurt, staying in one of the European airports a few hours to get a connecting flight, a transit visa is now a mandatory requirement. Though such legitimate travellers do not enter the country at all, just changing planes at the airport, the British, German and other Governments insist on the passenger that a transit visa should be obtained first, before even a ticket can be issued by the travel agent.
In Frankfurt, aircraft arriving from most Asian and African countries are parked away from the main terminal. Before passengers disembark to take the airport bus to the terminal building, immigration and police officers board the aircraft and begin checking the passports of passengers about to disembark. Any European looking passenger waving a cover of an EC passport is allowed to pass, without even opening the pages. Any Asian or African passenger is thoroughly checked, whether the passenger has any intention of entering the country or not. This practice is blatantly discriminatory and a violation of basic human rights. Considering the bilateral air travel agreements and the hub and spoke operation of international airlines, a Sri Lankan traveller will find it difficult to avoid passing through an intermediate country in Europe, to reach destinations in Africa and other non EC countries.
The worst offenders are Britain, Germany, France and the Benelux countries. They go to the extent of erecting a fake customs post at the air-bridge itself so that they check the passports of disembarking passengers. For passengers boarding planes within the EC, sometimes a fake security or immigration counter is erected to check for transit visas. The worst humiliation I suffered couple of years back was in Colombo, where I saw two Europeans behind the AirLanka check-in counter. They were going through the Sri Lankan passports. First I assumed them to be anti-terrorism advisors for AirLanka. When I questioned them, one stated that he is from the German Embassy and the other represents the EC in Colombo, and they were checking for forged Visas. I confronted them and stated that to begin with the fact that they were only checking the passports of Asian looking passengers and not European looking ones, the practice itself is discriminatory. Secondly, I stated that I only have a contract with AirLanka (from where I purchased the ticket) and the EC or the European Embassy has no part in that contract. After the commotion I raised, these officials faded away. This is a very high-handed act by these European Govermments. How can they hide behind the AirLanka counter and check whether there are forged Visas. On the other hand, will the EC allow Sri Lankan Government officials to sit behind British Airways, KLM and Lufthansa counters in European airports, to check the movements of suspected terrorists? Terrorism is a more serious charge than obtaining a forged visa. Apart from the problem of forged visas, we have heard in the papers how American and British visas were issued by corrupt embassy officials for a fee in Nigeria. So there are corrupt embassy officials as well as outside criminal elements engaged in the visa business.
One must not forget that the EC has imposed strict conditions on airlines flying to European capitals. The airline is responsible for ensuring that a passenger has a valid visa, even before a ticket is issued to a European destination. Then the airline staff carries out a strict visa check, before issuing a boarding pass. If the airline has taken a passenger without a valid visa to a European capital and the passenger is stranded at the airport, the airline is liable to bring the passenger back, and also a fine will be imposed on the airline by the EC.
From a legal sense, every traveller should be allowed the freedom to change a plane at any international airport, without having to obtain a transit visa. The issue of a transit visa arises, only if the passenger clears immigration and steps outside the airport to break the journey for a few days. International Civil Aviation Organisation should take up this issue as one hindering freedom of travel. Moreover, the UN charter guarantees every individual the freedom of travel. As long as the traveller is changing a plane at an international airport, freedom of travel without a "transit visa" should be a basic human right.
Let us now look at the hassle of getting this "transit" visa. One has to queue up at the British or German embassy at 3.00 a.m. just to get the chance to lodge the transit visa application in. A high fee is charged (Rs 3000) just for the application and if it is rejected no refund is given. After you lodge the application, a date is given for the interview. At the embassy you are treated as the most downtrodden person under the earth, assuming you are a parasite waiting for the "golden" opportunity to enter the land of opportunity illegally. They forget that there are millions of Sri Lankans who are far happier to be in this country than anywhere else, but have to travel through Europe, merely as a quirk of international travel peculiarities. At the interview all kinds of very personal questions related to employment, family, assets are probed. Sometimes even deeds of properties and bank statements have to be presented to obtain this transit visa. Some embassies that refuse the visa, place a stamp on the passport "visa refused". The passport is a personal document and no embassy has the right to place such a derogatory remark on a passport.
The immigration to Western countries by economic refugees masquerading as political refugees was promoted by the EC, which was duped by LTTE propaganda. Now they have realized that most of the so called Tamil civilians escaping "genocide", first have to pay a exit visa tax to the LTTE and then travel a day through Sinhalese dominated areas to get to the airport. Also, since the unfortunate events of July 1983, no attacks have taken place in the south of Sri Lanka against Tamil civilians, in spite of terrorist acts such as the Central Bank bomb and the Dehiwala train bomb, aimed at provoking the people. These countries also forget that there are millions of EC nationals migrating to countries such as Australia, New Zealand, USA and South Africa. (By the way, a European migrating to a country is called a "settler' and the developing country national migrating to a European country is called an "immigrant")
On the surface this practice of insisting on a transit visa seem to be aimed at preventing illegal immigration. I fail to see how someone disembarking from a scheduled international flight at a highly secure European airport for the sole purpose of boarding another connecting flight, can be an illegal immigrant. On further examination, the true reason for this inhumane practice emerges. In the days of the "cold war" with the former communist states, most Western European countries welcomed political refugees as a means of weakening the communist system.
If the EC countries want to prevent such blatant violation of the refugee law, the law itself must be changed, rather than inconveniencing genuine travellers. In trying to retain the refugee law, the EC is violating the basic human rights of millions and millions of innocent and legitimate international travellers. The practice of forcing only some Asian and African nationals to obtain transit visas is in itself discriminatory and akin to the practice of apartheid.
We fully recognize the plight of EC nations that face the problem of economic refugees masquerading as political refugees. In the past LTTE sympathizers flushed the passports in the aircraft toilet and claiming UK political asylum on arrival as stateless persons. Some deported Tamil asylum seekers stripped naked at the Heathrow airport to prevent deportation. This was the background to this draconian practice of insisting on transit visas. But the current practice of this discriminatory transit visa violates the very noble principle of having an Asylum law. The solution should be to first of all change the Asylum laws to permit only the genuine asylum seekers. There are a number of ways of achieving this, which are listed below:
1. Change the asylum law in EC countries, to allow only the legitimate asylum seekers. The initial reason for having an asylum law (allow former communist state citizens to ask for political asylum, so that the western media can go and publicize the weaknesses of the communist system) has been taken over by events. The benefit of having an asylum law should be weighed against the cost the legitimate travellers pay in terms of transit visas. One way of striking a balance is to ensure that before arriving at an EC airport, asylum seekers must first lodge the claim at the EC embassy in the country of origin or a third country. The logical argument for supporting the asylum seeker is that he is so persecuted, he has no time to enter a foreign embassy to seek a visa, as his life is in danger. In the Sri Lankan context most asylum seekers claim "genocide" by the majority Sinhalese.
2. If the EC countries are eager to retain the Asylum provision, then have a judge on call at the airport to quickly dispense with asylum cases, on the spot. Unsuccessful applicants would be placed under detention, pending deportation, without further right of appeal.
3. Western countries initially faced the problem of Tamil "refugees" destroying the passport and tickets after boarding the aircraft. The immigration authorities were helpless to repatriate such passengers, without the basic documentation. This problem can be solved in one of two ways. First, since the passengers purposely destroyed the documentation, they should automatically be barred from applying for refugee status and kept in detention. The more logical method would be to request all airlines to make a photocopy of every passenger ticket and passport for record purposes. These copies can be used to identify the "asylum seekers" who have destroyed the travel documents, purposely.
4. Make a concerted effort to fight the "asylum industry' that has now cropped up in EC countries. Make it extremely difficult for anyone to seek asylum, and make detention conditions harsh and deportations rapid.
The major cause for illegal migration is the economic disparity between the developed and developing countries. If this root cause were not addressed in the long term, then economically disadvantaged citizens would always try to escape for greener pastures. The demise of the communist regimes in the former Soviet Union (FSU) and Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), has led the EC countries to divert most of the development assistance to these countries, thus depriving needed aid to the developing world. Most of the CEE countries would be incorporated to the EC soon, creating a stronger West, resulting in more poverty for developing countries.
It is clearly evident from the above that the EC practice of insisting on a "transit visa" for travellers changing planes at European airports, is illegal and violates the freedom of movement guaranteed under the UN human rights charter. In addition, the checking of passports of Asian and African nationals at the airport gate as they disembark, is discriminatory and humiliating. A person becomes a potential visitor/immigrant to a country only when the person presents himself/herself at the immigration counter at the airport.
Therefore we urge the EC countries to stop this illegal and discriminatory practice of insisting on a transit visa with immediate effect. We also urge the human rights organizations such as Amnesty International to take this issue of violating the legitimate travel rights of Asian/African passengers. In addition, there are solid grounds to file a case at the European Court to fight the injustice and we hope the foreign ministries of Asian and African countries take up this basic issue, which affect the basic rights of individuals.
Continue to Plus page 4 * Of cattle theft and severe punishment * Book Review
Return to the Plus contents page
| HOME PAGE | FRONT PAGE | EDITORIAL/OPINION | NEWS / COMMENT | BUSINESS
Please send your comments and suggestions on this web site to
info@suntimes.is.lk or to
webmaster@infolabs.is.lk