The Political Column

7th March 1999

Polls chief atop a cross

By our Political Correspondent

Though the Supreme Court has taken up the appeal for a change of date of the provincial elections, the Catholic church is going ahead with its mass protest on Sunday.

The protest, billed to be one of the biggest by the church since the schools takeover crisis of 1962 is against what is described as the insensitivity of the elections commissioner in fixing the polls date on April 1 which coincides with the Holy Week.

The grievance of the Catholic church is that the Elections Commissioner did not even have the common courtesy to respond to the letter sent by the Archbishop of Colombo requesting him to put off the April 1st elections due to religious concerns. Parish priests throughout the country read out a letter sent by the Archbishop at Sunday mass, complaining that the Elections Commissioner had failed to respond to the letter other than making media statements that he was unable to change the date according to the Provincial Councils Elections Act.

On an earlier occasion, too, the Catholic church protested over the dates fixed for the local government elections and the commissioner had then responded positively by advancing the polls date as a means of protecting the rights of the minorities.

It appears that on this occasion, the Elections Commissioner has been tied down by the law governing the provincial councils elections. But the Commissioner could have written to the Archbishop explaining his position and giving the legal background to his decision.

On the contrary, the Commissioner just made a media statement, apparently thinking it would not be necessary to reply the Archbishop.

The end result was the decision by the Catholic church to call for protest demonstrations by Catholics in all churches on Sunday.

After the Catholic church announced plans for the demonstrations, the government took urgent steps to settle the dispute.

The Attorney-General was told by the President to go to the Supreme Court and take up the matter on the basis of the concerns expressed by the minorities.

On Thursday a three-judge bench led by the Chief Justice told the Commissioner of Elections to consult other parties before a decision is taken, probably on Tuesday.

Most observers feel it would be prudent for the Church to put off the protests and wait for the court decision in a favourable situation where other parties also are likely to support the call for a postponement.

The Elections Commissioner had fixed the date for April 1, apparently thinking that it would ensure peaceful elections since it falls between Bak Poya Day on March 31 and Good Friday on April 2. But now the commissioner appears to have realized that he has acted unreasonably towards the Christian.

The Supreme Court now wants to know what the other parties feel about the postponement. If it is postponed by one week, the court is considering whether the other parties would object on the grounds that they would not be able to sustain their campaign during this extended period.

It is now learnt that Hemachandra Wijetunga of the extremist Bhoomiputra party is likely to oppose any postponement and state lawyers are wondering what to do in that case.

Eventually the responsibility for this new controversy will go largely to the elections commissioner.

The cabinet of ministers also took up the protest demonstrations planned by the Catholic church.

Minister Jeyaraj Fernandopulle sought permission from the President to participate in the protest. "My family members will participate in this and as a Catholic I will also have to participate. From the beginning I stood for justice and requested the change of date. Since the UNP is planning to make political mileage out of this protest, the PA also should participate in full strength. Please give me permission to participate," he said.

The Minister accused the UNP of not issuing a statement on the matter and not cooperating with the government or other authorities in settling it. He charged that the UNP was behind the whole dispute.

The President told Mr. Fernandopulle he could participate in the protest in his private capacity.

The government took the initiative to talk to the Catholic church over this matter when Minister C.V. Gunaratne who attended Sunday mass at his parish church at St. Mary's Dehiwela on February 28 heard the letter calling on Catholics to protest.

He immediately took steps for the President to meet the Archbishop. On Tuesday, the Archbishop, the Rt. Rev. Dr. Nicholas Marcus Fernando along with the Vicars General Rev. Fr. Kingsley Jayamanne and Rev. Fr. Placidus de Silva took part in the discussion.

The President first briefed the church delegation on the background of events that led to the Elections Commissioner's decision. The President said it was difficult to change the date since it was taken on a Supreme Court ruling. But she promised the Archbishop she would direct the Attorney-General to see whether there was any legal provision to postpone the elections.

The Catholic church in its protest has emphasised there are no party political motives. The protest is not for the UNP or against the PA but a move in the interest of a minority.

Another ongoing dispute is the row over the appointment of Dhammika Kitulgoda as the secretary general of parliament.

At the weekly cabinet meeting on Wednesday, Minister Richard Pathirana brought up the motion tabled by the UNP and other parties to protest against Mr. Kitulgoda's appointment. He asked whether the government would debate the motion or whether other action would be taken to settle the problem.

Minister Ratnasiri Wickremanayake, who in recent months has been at loggerheads with Minister S. Thondaman's CWC, hit out again saying the CWC MP, P. P. Devaraj also had signed the protest motion with the UNP.

Minister Fernandopulle said he favoured a debate on the matter.

"We should not run away. We should face it. This is another ugly campaign by the UNP," he said.

Mr. Fernandopulle said he would expose some UNPers during that debate and he could not help if some were hurt by it.

After his speech Mr. Feranandopulle who is the minister of parliamentary affairs went out of the cabinet room and telephoned Mr. Devaraj. The CWC MP confirmed that he had signed the motion since he believed the appointment was against parliamentary traditions.

Mr. Fernandopulle told him he had put the government in an embarrassing position. Minister Thondaman also spoke to Mr. Devaraj on the phone, saying the President was concerned. He then came back to the cabinet room and told the President that Mr. Devaraj was prepared to back out.

Speaker K. B. Ratnayake is also known to be concerned about the Kitulgoda dispute. He held talks with UNP leader Ranil Wickremesinghe and the House leader Ratnasiri Wickremanayake in a bid to reach a settlement.

It is likely the debate will take place early next month.

On a broader front, the campaign for the five provincial council elections is getting into gear though the date of the poll is still in the balance. With the President's initiative, for an all-party monitoring committee also getting down to practical matters, hopes are high that the elections will be relatively free and fair.

But there still appears to be a difference of opinion in the UNP over the decision of the party leadership to respond positively to the President's invitation.

Some UNPers still feel the party has played into the hands of the President. They say the talks gave the President a way to get out of the Wayamba muddle.

The UNP is likely to be cautious about the committee and may pull out if it feels the work is not moving satisfactorily.

Meanwhile, Colombo's Mayor Karu Jayasuriya, chief ministerial candidate for the western province, is playing an increasingly prominent role in the party. His latest move is to get the so-called Premadasa and Dissanayake factions more actively involved in the party.

An evening meeting at Gamini Dissanayake's residence at Alfred House Gardens saw a number of party enthusiasts reappearing on the scene.

The meeting which was organised by Srima Dissanayake, the UNP's presidential candidate at the 1994 elections had the support of the controversial political broker A.J.M. Muzammil. Some 200 businessmen from the Muslim and Borah community attended this meeting.

Mr. Jayasuriya told them the upcoming election was a crucial one and he hoped that the state terrorism that was seen in Wayamba would never be repeated. He called on all activists to come forward and work hard to save the process of democratic elections.

He said the UNP was working out a massive development plan for the millennium and he hoped the voters would give it a chance to put Sri Lanka on a sound economic footing.

Mr. Muzammil hailed Mr. Jayasuriya as a versatile businessman and diplomat who had now proved himself to be an equally good political administrator. He pledged full support for him.

He told the Muslim and Borah businessmen to campaign for Mr. Jayasuriya even in their factories and offices.

It is known that Mr. Jayasuriya is also trying to have a dialogue with Hema Premadasa and get her to throw her weight behind his campaign.

Thus many analysts believe that whatever the results of the elections, Karu Jayasuriya would emerge as a big name and a bridge builder. Meanwhile, the all-party election monitoring committee presided over by President Kumaratunga held its first meeting on Thursday.

The party leaders arrived at Temple Trees by 5:30 p.m. but the President was one hour late.

Minister Ratnasiri Wickremanayake who was also present wanted to start the meeting early without the President, but others were not keen.

The JVP delegate said he would wait for the President even if he had to wait for hours.

The President arrived around 6:30 and apologized. At the outset of the meeting, the JVP delegate said they could not accept the minutes of the last meeting since most of the submissions the party made were either misrepresented or omitted. o

UNP General Secretary Gamini Atukorale expressed similar views.

The President agreed but pointed out that the JVP barely 24 hours after the last meeting had told the TNL it had no confidence in the President's initiatives. The JVP delegate denied the party General Secretary Tilvyn Silva had made such a remark.

He said somebody was trying to mislead the President.

As the meeting progressed, Mr. Atukorale reiterated the UNP's resolution to give more powers to the elections commissioner.

He said the government had so far not responded to the UNP proposal.

The President said the proposed new constitution envisaged wide powers for the Election Commissioner — wider than those proposed by the UNP — and she was not keen on bringing in some half-baked legislation.

It was in other words a rejection of the UNP proposals.

The JVP delegate Nandana Gunatilleke said the poster war was a one of the main causes of election violence. The President agreed but asked what could be done. Mr. Atukorale said she should order the police to enforce election laws relating to posters.

Eventually, all parties agreed that all posters and cut-outs should be removed within 72 hours.

They agreed that party organisers should be asked to remove the posters. If they did not the President would order the police to act.

A divisive atmosphere prevailed when the President again went back to the past and referred to alleged election malpractices or violence committed by the JVP and the UNP. She said she was doing this because all attention was focused on Wayamba and people were forgetting the past.

But the JVP insisted they had not come together to dig up the past while the UNP's Mr. Atukorale referred to more current incidents including an alleged attack on a meeting attended by Mr. Wickremesinghe in Gampola.

The party delegates then agreed to set up an election monitoring secretariat to coordinate matters with the government. It was suggested that the secretariat be set up in the Prime Minister's office, but the President said she would have to get approval from the prime minister.

Right of reply

Minister and LSSP leader Batty Weerakoon writes:

In this column last Sunday, there was a reference to me.

It states that at a meeting of political parties with the President, I had proposed that "more controls should be introduced on the independent media."

This is not true. I made no such proposal or suggestion.

An earlier paragraph in the same column mentions that I "accused the private media of blowing up the Wayamba controversy and called for restraints."

What I did say has not been reported. What I referred to was the report on the private life of a PA Chief Ministerial candidate. I said that although this was highly provocative there was no law to restrain such publication and that therefore the political parties with influence over those papers should restrain them. It was on this statement of mine that the President said there were people at the meeting who did have such influence.

Situation Report

Editorial/Opinion Contents